Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2011-01-17PLANNING & STRATEGIC INITIATIVES COMMITTEE MINUTES JANUARY 17, 2011 CITY OF KITCHENER The Planning and Strategic Initiatives Committee met this date, commencing at 4:00 p.m. Present: Councillor B. Vrbanovic - Chair Mayor C. Zehr and Councillors S. Davey, J. Gazzola, Y. Fernandes, K. Galloway, P. Singh, B. Ioannidis, Z. Janecki, F. Etherington and D. Glenn-Graham Staff: C. Ladd, Chief Administrative Officer D. Chapman, Deputy CAO & City Treasurer, Finance & Corporate Services J. Willmer, Deputy CAO, Community Services P. Houston, Deputy CAO, Infrastructure Services R. Regier, Executive Director of Economic Development A. Pinard, Director of Planning G. Murphy, Director of Engineering J. McBride, Director of Transportation Planning S. Adams, Director of Community & Corporate Planning H. Gross, Director of Asset Management M. May, Interim Director of Human Resources C. Bluhm, Manager of Downtown Community Development B. Steiner, Senior Environmental Planner R. Schirm, Supervisor of Crossing Guards C. Goodeve, Committee Administrator 1. CSD-11-004 - LOCAL ENVIRONMENTAL ACTION FUND (LEAF) - RECOMMENDATION FOR 2010 APPLICATIONS FROM YMCA AND CREW - OPERATIONAL IMPROVEMENTS FOR FUTURE YEARS The Committee considered Community Services Department report CSD-11-004, dated December 21, 2010 regarding 2010 Local Environmental Action Fund (LEAF) grant applications for the YMCA and Community Renewable Energy Waterloo (CREW) as well as proposed operational improvements. Ms. B. Steiner provided an overview of the issues that have emerged regarding the evaluation of applications to LEAF and grant administration as raised at the May 3, 2010 Council meeting. Mr. Scott Piatkowski, Citizen Advisor, LEAF Steering Committee indicated that at that time, Council also deferred the final disposition of the 2010 LEAF applications submitted by the local YMCA and CREW pending the outcome of the investigation into the feasibility of providing loans under the LEAF program. He stated that discussions with the YMCA revealed that a loan would not be of interest to them and, further, they have their own source of borrowed money at an attractive rate if that was the route they wished to pursue. He further advised that the purpose of the CREW proposal was to seek funding to assist with offsetting the cost of rooftop photovoltaic systems to allow up to 25 faith-based institutions to have a 10kW system on their property. He added that discussions with CREW indicate that a grant would be preferable to a loan and would be more effective in removing the barriers for faith institutions to become involved in the Province’s microFIT program for solar rooftop installations. He noted that CREW has confirmed that they will amend their 2010 application and re-submit to the 2011 LEAF intake; as such, neither a grant nor a loan is recommended for CREW’s 2010 application. Ms. Steiner advised that for loans to be a sensible option for an organization, there must exist the possibility of revenue generation from the project such that money could, at some point, be allocated to the repayment of the loan. She commented that adding a loan function would require staff to develop a separate and entire “loan system” and would further add to staff time in administering LEAF. She stated that opportunities for revenue-generating environmental projects are limited and the City’s past experience with loan programs would suggest there should be no reliance on the loan being repaid to permit these monies to be “re-granted” or “re- loaned.” For these reasons, it is not recommended that loans be provided through the LEAF program. Questions were raised regarding the provision of LEAF grants to support school ground greening projects. Ms. Steiner advised that numerous applications for funding have been received over the years for such programs and a standard, equitable approach should be developed for funding these kinds of requests. She stated that staff from both the Planning PLANNING & STRATEGIC INITIATIVES COMMITTEE MINUTES JANUARY 17, 2011 - 3 - CITY OF KITCHENER 1. CSD-11-004 - LOCAL ENVIRONMENTAL ACTION FUND (LEAF) - RECOMMENDATION FOR 2010 APPLICATIONS FROM YMCA AND CREW - OPERATIONAL IMPROVEMENTS FOR FUTURE YEARS (CONT’D) and Operations Divisions intend to consult with the school boards to set out how the City should collaborate in school greening projects, and to how to fund them equitably. She noted that this is anticipated to commence early in 2011 in order to provide at least interim guidance to the 2011 deliberations of the LEAF Steering Committee. In regards to the issue of donations, Mayor C. Zehr indicated that he was not supportive of outsourcing the fundraising of the LEAF program. He suggested that the City be proactive when receiving an application to discuss / suggest potential partners. He noted that this could serve to leverage other funding sources and extend the LEAF grants beyond the initial $5M investment by not having the City as the sole source of funding. He requested that information be provided on the potential inclusion of grant criteria, specifying that applications submitted at a certain monetary threshold be required to have other funding partners. Mayor Zehr further suggested that the issue of sponsorships should be examined in a broader context to include such things as special events. Mr. M. May advised that the Corporate Management Team has discussed this and a working group was formed to look into the issue of sponsorships in greater detail. The ongoing monitoring of projects that have received funding through LEAF was discussed, and it was noted that there is a requirement that an applicant provide a progress report on their projects. Mayor Zehr suggested that tracking should be done of the other funds that have been leveraged by grant recipients. Ms. Steiner expressed support for this proposal, noting that this could be included as a metric within the required monitoring report. On motion by Councillor Y. Fernandes - it was resolved: “That the 2010 Local Environmental Action Fund (LEAF) grant application from the YMCA not be approved; and, That the 2010 LEAF grant application from Community Renewable Energy Waterloo (CREW) be amended by the applicant and referred to the 2011 intake; and, That the issues that have emerged regarding the evaluation of applications to LEAF and grant administration in the first two (2) years (2009 and 2010) be addressed as described in Community Services Department report CSD-11-004; and, That loans from LEAF not be considered; and further, That the City not change the fund’s operating framework to market LEAF to actively pursue donations from other sources.” 2.INS-11-010 - TRANSPORTATION PLANNING OVERVIEW The Committee was in receipt of Infrastructure Services Department report INS-11-010, dated January 12, 2011 providing an overview as to the interrelated nature of the Cycling Master Plan, Long-Term Parking Strategy, Parking Enterprise Business Case and Transportation Demand Management (TDM) Study and how each supports the goals of the City of Kitchener Strategic Plan. Mr. J. Willmer reviewed the report and advised that a key concept is that surface parking is considered an interim use, with the idea that those lands would eventually be re-developed. He added that if the City’s transportation infrastructure, in particular roads and parking facilities, are to continue to provide an acceptable level of service as the City grows it is necessary to influence community members to modify travel choices. He commented that the TDM program would provide the basis for the City to positively influence such a shift toward sustainable modes of transport, through a comprehensive combination of education, policies, programs, services and products that promote sustainable transportation choices. He further PLANNING & STRATEGIC INITIATIVES COMMITTEE MINUTES JANUARY 17, 2011 - 4 - CITY OF KITCHENER 2.INS-11-010 - TRANSPORTATION PLANNING OVERVIEW (CONT’D) advised that the Cycling Master Plan, Long-Term Parking Strategy and Parking Enterprise Business Case are related initiatives whose development is consistent with TDM principles and balance the community’s interests in social vitality, environmental viability and economic prosperity. He then outlined how these interrelated initiatives align with the City’s Strategic Plan. Mr. J. McBride provided an overview of the City’s Transportation Master Plan, which is anticipated to be completed in 2011. He stated that it would define and prioritize a transportation network that is supportive of all modes of travel including walking, cycling and transit; thereby reducing dependency on single occupant vehicle trips and the effect of community growth on roads and parking facilities. He advised that the TDM is being prepared as part of the City’s Official Plan review, and once enacted it will be updated every five years. He noted that it is staffs’ intent to seek approval in principle of the TDM Study at the February 7, 2011 Planning and Strategic Initiatives Committee meeting, with final consideration being given to it during Council’s 2011 Budget deliberation process. 3.CAO-11-001 - LONG-TERM PARKING STRATEGY FOR DOWNTOWN KITCHENER The Committee considered Chief Administrator’s Office report CAO-11-001, dated January 17, 2011, recommending approval of the Long-Term Parking Strategy, which provides an analysis and insight on the long-term implications for parking in Downtown Kitchener. Mr. C. Bluhm reviewed the Long-Term Parking Strategy, advising that 72% of Downtown employees currently drive to work. This means that for every 100 new jobs that could be created Downtown, 72 parking spaces would have to be built. He stated that estimates for the Region of Waterloo indicate that Downtown Kitchener’s employment could grow by 4,700 by 2031. He commented that this equates to a need for up to 3,200 new parking spaces, which is most likely not feasible to build. He added that such demand would also hinder the City’s ability to redevelop its surface lots. He stated that the Long-Term Parking Strategy looks beyond the policy framework to allow a better understanding of the four main factors that might influence commuting habits, thus reducing long-term parking demand, being: 1. Residential development; 2. Price of gas; 3. Price of parking; and, 4. Convenience of rapid transit. Mr. Bluhm advised that the goal is to understand how these four factors can influence demand, so that the City can establish policies, strategies, and actions to direct future parking demands toward a preferred scenario. He noted that what is clear from the analysis is that the cost of transportation will be the most influential factor on long-term parking demand. As costs increase, commuters contemplate alternative modes, for example: If municipal parking rates increase by 10% from 2011-2014 and 6% every year after, parking demand could reduce by an estimated 1,500 spaces by the year 2031; and, If average gas prices rise to $1.60 by 2031, parking demand could reduce by up to an additional 1,875 spaces. Mr. Bluhm added that these factors work hand-in-hand with an improved transit system. The majority of parkers displaced by rising parking rates, and a portion of parkers displaced by rising gas prices, are likely to switch to transit. He noted that ultimately, the City must balance Downtown employment growth with environmental sustainability, an effective transportation network, and fiscal responsibility. He stated that to do so, the City needs to monitor the influence that the four factors have on commuting habits. In particular, the City needs to continue with aggressive annual monthly parking rate increases as its primary tool for effecting parking demand and develop TDM programs, which can assist Downtown employees in shifting away from auto dependency. He commented that striving to create a long-term surplus of parking would put the City in the best position to achieve its goals of a ‘Dynamic Downtown’. However, it may take a number of years to achieve this surplus, thus an additional parking garage may be needed in the core in order to accommodate growth. PLANNING & STRATEGIC INITIATIVES COMMITTEE MINUTES JANUARY 17, 2011 - 5 - CITY OF KITCHENER 3. CAO-11-001 - LONG-TERM PARKING STRATEGY FOR DOWNTOWN KITCHENER (CONT’D) Questions were raised regarding the potential impact of the Region of Waterloo Rapid Transit project, and Mr. Bluhm advised that rising parking rates can significantly impact transit ridership. He added that since trip reduction is typically not an option for monthly parking permit holders, they are more likely to search for cheaper rates or use alternative modes of transportation to eliminate the need for a monthly permit altogether. He pointed out that parking price increases combined with an inefficient transit system will result in greater carpooling or parking substitutes, such as finding an alternate, cheaper parking space further from work. He further responded that ridership growth on rapid transit lines typically result from two factors: improved convenience or cost competitiveness. He stated that cost competitiveness is directly attributable to the cost of parking and the price of gas commuters must pay; if these costs remain low, ridership growth will be low. Several members inquired into how the City compares to other municipalities with regard to parking costs. Mr. Bluhm advised that while Kitchener has the highest parking rates in the Region, when compared to other large metropolitan centres, such as Toronto, Calgary and Winnipeg, Kitchener’s rates are one of the lowest in the country. Information was requested comparing the cost to park in Kitchener with non-provincial centres, such as the Cities of Hamilton, Brampton, London, and Oshawa. In response to questions regarding the impact of a shift in business culture, Mr. Bluhm advised that rising gas prices might not translate into a reduced number of monthly parking permits issued. He commented that Downtown employees may be more likely to telecommute on various days throughout the week, in order to make fewer overall trips to work, but still require a parking permit. He added that an effective TDM strategy can facilitate parking surpluses, which can be used to attract new Downtown employment. He noted that it is proposed that as the TDM strategy is proposed to be reviewed every five years this should enable it to react to changing behaviours of businesses. Members questioned what would happen if the proposed initiatives were not pursued. Mr. Bluhm responded that if the City finds itself with a parking shortage, the lack of parking supply could prevent employment growth. Accordingly, the City would have to continue to build parking to satisfy demand; or, transfer some of the responsibility for providing parking to the private sector. He noted that currently, the rates for most private parking providers are incorporated into lease agreements, which generally keep pace with the City’s rates. He commented that at present, it would not be economically viable for a private-sector company to construct a parking garage in the Downtown; however, one risk is that vacant lots might be converted to accommodate surface parking. Concerns were expressed as to whether raising parking rates would affect Downtown Kitchener’s competitive advantage in attracting new businesses. Mr. Bluhm advised that an analysis was undertaken to determine the year in which Downtown office lease rates, for buildings where tenants must lease parking spaces from the City, lose their competitive advantage in the local marketplace. He stated that barring any major lease rate fluctuations, Downtown office space remains generally competitive until 2025 when coupled with surface parking rates, and until 2021 when coupled with underground parking. In response to questions concerning the provision of short-term parking, Mr. J. McBride advised that to support short-stay users of office buildings, restaurants, shops and other services, the City tries to ensure a suitable supply of short-term spaces within surface lots and structures. He noted that these spaces are monitored every two years to evaluate occupancy levels. Questions were raised regarding parking requirements that need to be satisfied before a new user can occupy a building or site. Mr. McBride advised that the primary tool for requiring private-sector provision of parking is the City’s Zoning By-law, with requirements being generally calculated based on fixed physical elements, such as square footage. He stated that an analysis of how this could be modified to affect a model shift away from single occupancy vehicles would be examined in part through the TDM program. PLANNING & STRATEGIC INITIATIVES COMMITTEE MINUTES JANUARY 17, 2011 - 6 - CITY OF KITCHENER 3. CAO-11-001 - LONG-TERM PARKING STRATEGY FOR DOWNTOWN KITCHENER (CONT’D) Alternatives to the construction of an additional parking garage to accommodate growth until the Region has made a decision on rapid transit were discussed. It was suggested that facilities such as the Kitchener Memorial Auditorium Complex could be used for commuter parking, with Regional buses bringing workers into the Downtown from those locations. Mr. McBride advised that this type of initiative has been tried in the past for special events with mixed results. It was suggested that this could be examined as part of the TDM program. Additional information was requested on potential measures the City could enact to safeguard its parking revenue stream, such as 12-month contracts or corporate discounts to companies that rent over 100 parking spaces. Further, staff agreed to circulate a copy of their presentation to the Committee. Councillor B. Vrbanovic advised that the recommendations contained in Report CAO-11-001 would be dealt with in conjunction with those put forward in Infrastructure Services Department report INS-11-005 (Parking Organizational Review - Parking Enterprise Business Case), to be considered later this date. 4. INS-11-005 - PARKING ORGANIZATIONAL REVIEW - PARKING ENTERPRISE BUSINESS CASE The Committee considered Infrastructure Services Department report INS-11-005, dated January 5, 2011 regarding the establishment of a Parking Enterprise. In addition, the Committee was also in receipt of the Parking Organizational Review Business Case, dated January 2011. Mr. J. McBride reviewed the circulated Business Case, advising that it is proposed that the Parking Operation and the parking component of Transportation Planning form an enterprise within the Infrastructure Services Department. He stated that in developing a business model for the parking operation, consideration was given to a number of alternatives, including maintaining the status quo, and the establishment of a Parking Authority. He added that the Parking Enterprise will form a key component of the Transportation Master Plan and many of the Transportation Demand Management (TDM) initiatives are dependant and positively influenced by parking policy, pricing, and availability. Likewise, the Cycling Master Plan will benefit from the interrelationship between traffic, parking, TDM, walking and the broader transportation network. He noted that the Parking Enterprise would fund the implementation of both the Cycling Master Plan and TDM initiatives. He pointed out that in order to effectively implement these and other strategies supportive of the Transportation Master Plan, additional staff resources will be required; being a Manager of Parking, a Transportation Demand Management Coordinator, and a Transportation Planning Project Manager. Mr. McBride further advised that historically, the parking operation has contributed considerable funds to the City’s general revenue. These have ranged from a small deficit in 2000 to a projected net profit of $1,423,000. in 2010, excluding subsidies. He noted that the average net revenue generated over the past 11 years is approximately $745,000. annually, excluding subsidies. He stated that the Parking Enterprise proposal includes fee increases for monthly customers at a rate of 10% for the first 4 years of operations, a dividend to the City of $1,750,000. adjusted annually for inflation and allocation of parking related development charge funding of approximately $5,989,500. He stated that it is also recommended that $1,070,000. be included as seed funding to the Parking Enterprise in 2011 to offset the membrane replacement costs for the Duke and Ontario Garage which is currently budgeted for in the City’s 10-Year Capital Forecast. This option also allows for the funding of $5.25M toward the Charles and Water Garage. He noted that the proposed dividend, combined with funding of all future operating and capital costs by the Enterprise, is expected to result in a net tax levy increase of 0.51% in 2011. Clarification was requested as to the parking subsidies currently provided by the City. Mr. McBride advised that these include free parking after 6:00 p.m., free parking in the Downtown over the holiday season, as well as various other costs all totalling approximately $1M. PLANNING & STRATEGIC INITIATIVES COMMITTEE MINUTES JANUARY 17, 2011 - 7 - CITY OF KITCHENER 4. INS-11-005 - PARKING ORGANIZATIONAL REVIEW - PARKING ENTERPRISE BUSINESS CASE (CONT’D) Concerns were expressed over the proposed transfer of $1,070,000. to the Parking Enterprise in 2011. Mr. D. Chapman advised that this is intended to cover the costs of work currently budgeted for in the 10-Year Capital Forecast. He added that if this was not provided, it would be preferable to wait a year to implement the Enterprise and have the costs for this work funded through the Capital program. Mr. McBride advised that staff examined whether the Enterprise could be established in a deficit position and it was determined that this would not be feasible. Councillor J. Gazzola requested a copy of the Parking Divisions’ balance sheet as of the end of 2010 be circulated to the Committee, to show the existing condition prior to the potential establishment of the Parking Enterprise. Concerns were expressed regarding the proposed creation of three new full-time positions. Mr. McBride clarified that the Manager of Parking and Transportation Demand Management Coordinator positions will be fully funded from the Parking Enterprise. The Transportation Planning Project Manager will be equally funded from the Parking Enterprise, the Development Charge fund and street lighting capital projects accounts. He added that regardless of whether an Enterprise is established, additional staff resources will be required to implement the Cycling Master Plan, TDM program and develop other strategies and initiatives supportive of the policies to be developed in the Transportation Master Plan. Ms. C. Ladd noted that at their present composition, it took over six years for staff to finalize the TDM study, adding that the existing level of staff resources are not sufficient to effectively manage new parking projects to meet critical demands and timelines. Additional information was requested outlining what could be pursued if only one or two of the proposed positions were filled. At the request of several members, Mr. McBride agreed to provide information outlining other municipalities’ experiences with implementing a Parking Enterprise. In addition, he agreed to examine the possibility of whether this proposal would enable Transportation Planning staff to dedicate more time toward traffic calming. Clarification was requested regarding the payment of debt incurred by the Parking portfolio. Mr. McBride advised that as a municipal enterprise, any debt would be funded through user rates. He noted that currently, capital expenditures for Parking Operations are funded from the current tax pool. He added that transferring parking into an Enterprise would allow projects to be financed through the Enterprise and therefore would not compete with other City projects. He stated that separating the Parking portfolio from the tax-supported budget has the potential to improve the management and business operations for the program over the long term. It would also reduce the overall property tax burden as future capital costs would no longer be funded through the tax base. Questions were raised regarding the impact of not pursuing an aggressive approach to increasing the municipal parking rates. Mr. McBride advised that this would affect the financial viability of the Enterprise. He stated that if only a 6% rate increase was pursued this would remove approximately $163,000. from the Enterprise’s budget. He added that one of the main advantages of retaining the parking operation in-house is ensuring Councils’ ability to control the balance between a profit centre and a public service. He noted that while the goal of an Enterprise is to cover all operating and capital costs and return a small profit, Council retains the ability to adjust rates and programs in response to public demand, fluctuations in the economy and growth patterns. Additional inquiries were made as to whether it would be possible to negate the proposed net tax levy increase. Mr. Chapman provided a breakdown of the various components that contribute to the proposed 0.51% levy increase and advised that consideration could always be given to phasing-in the implementation of the Cycling Master Plan and TDM in the Capital Forecast. Several members stated that while they were generally supportive of the tenets of the Long- Term Parking Strategy and the proposed Parking Enterprise, they would prefer to defer final consideration of these matters to Council’s budget deliberation process. In addition, concerns were expressed regarding the creation of the three new full-time positions. PLANNING & STRATEGIC INITIATIVES COMMITTEE MINUTES JANUARY 17, 2011 - 8 - CITY OF KITCHENER 4. INS-11-005 - PARKING ORGANIZATIONAL REVIEW - PARKING ENTERPRISE BUSINESS CASE (CONT’D) On motion by Councillor J. Gazzola - it was resolved: “That the following recommendation contained in Chief Administrator’s Office report CAO-11-001 (Long-Term Parking Strategy for Downtown Kitchener, dated January 17, be approved in principle, subject to final deliberation of the 2011 operating 2011), and capital budgets at the March 1, 2011 special Finance & Corporate Services Committee meeting: ‘That the Long-Term Parking Strategy, as attached to Chief Administrator’s Office report CAO-11-001, be approved; and, That staff be directed to act on the recommendations of the Long-Term Parking Strategy contained in Section 6; and further, That the goals of the Long-Term Parking Strategy, contained in Section 7, be considered, where appropriate, during the review of the City’s Transportation Master Plan.’” by recorded votes The following motion was voted on clause by clause, , with clauses 1, 2, 3 Carried UnanimouslyCarried and 4 a-d, f) and clause 4 e) , with Mayor C. Zehr and Councillors B. Vrbanovic, K. Galloway B. Ioannidis, Z. Janecki, F. Etherington and D. Glenn- Graham voting in favour and Councillors J. Gazzola, Y. Fernandes, S. Davey and P. Singh voting in opposition. On motion by Councillor J. Gazzola - it was resolved: “That consideration of the following recommendation contained in Infrastructure Services Department report INS-11-005 (Parking Organizational Review - Parking be approved in principle, subject Enterprise Business Case, dated January 5, 2011), to final deliberation of the 2011 operating and capital budgets at the March 1, 2011 special Finance & Corporate Services Committee meeting: ‘That a Parking Enterprise be approved in principle as outlined in the business case attached to Infrastructure Services Department report INS-11-005, subject to final 2011 budget approval; and, That monthly parking rate increases of 10% annually between 2011 and 2014 inclusive be incorporated into the annual budget; and, That a net tax levy increase of 0.51% in 2011 be referred to the 2011 budget review; and, That the following key principles of a Parking Enterprise be adopted: a) That all assets and liabilities associated with the expansion, maintenance, operation, ownership and potential sale of the City’s parking facilities become those of the Parking Enterprise; and, b) That an opening surplus of $1,070,000. in 2011 be funded from the City’s Capital Budget in order to complete scheduled structural repairs in the Duke & Ontario Garage; and, c) That an annual dividend in the amount of $1,750,000., plus annual inflationary increases, be paid to the City from the Parking Enterprise; and, PLANNING & STRATEGIC INITIATIVES COMMITTEE MINUTES JANUARY 17, 2011 - 9 - CITY OF KITCHENER 4. INS-11-005 - PARKING ORGANIZATIONAL REVIEW - PARKING ENTERPRISE BUSINESS CASE (CONT’D) d) That the Parking Enterprise annually retain all surplus funds in the appropriate reserve accounts in order to fund all future operating, capital improvement and expansion costs related to the municipal parking operation; and, e) That one (1) Parking Manager position (full-time), one (1) Transportation Demand Management Coordinator position (full-time) and one (1) Transportation Planning Project Manager position (full-time) be approved; and further, f) That annual funding for the implementation of the Cycling Master Plan in the amount of $200,000. and Transportation Demand Management initiatives in the amount of $200,000., as may be approved, be funded from the Parking Enterprise.’” 5.ADJOURNMENT On motion, the meeting adjourned at 7:22 p.m. Colin Goodeve Committee Administrator