Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutFCS-12-141 - Community Infrastructure Investment Fund Grant AppREPORT TO:Finance and Corporate Services Committee DATE OF MEETING: August 13, 2012 SUBMITTED BY:Dan Chapman, Deputy CAO PREPARED BY: Ryan Hagey, Director of Financial Planning 519-741-2353 WARD(S) INVOLVED:All DATE OF REPORT:August 7, 2012 REPORT NO.: FCS-12-141 SUBJECT: Community Infrastructure Improvement Fund (CIIF) Grant Application RECOMMENDATION: THAT the following project applications be approved to be submitted in priority sequence for consideration under the Community Infrastructure Improvement Fund: 1. Centennial Stadium Track 2. Centennial Stadium Field 3. Asphalt Surfacing for Primary Trails 4. Upgrades to Trail System 5. Playstructure Replacements 6. Knollwood Park Rehabilitation Project 7. Victoria Park Washrooms AND THAT the Waterloo Spur Line Multi Use Trail be endorsed by the City of Kitchener as a partner submission to be made by the Region of Waterloo; AND FURTHER THAT the Deputy CAO, Infrastructure Services be authorized to sign any Landlord Authorization forms for submissions made by other organizations to improve City facilities. BACKGROUND: On July 5, 2012, the Government of Canada announced the Community Infrastructure Improvement Fund (CIIF). The CIIF is meant to support the rehabilitation and improvement existing (including expansion) of community infrastructure facilities such as community centres, recreational buildings, local arenas, cultural facilities and other community facilities. This will improve the quality of community facilities and provide economic benefits, including support for job creation, in communities across Canada. ê ó ï The CIIF is a two year program with total funding of $150M. The allocation dedicated to Ontario is $49.6M. CIIF funding is available to a number of organizations including municipalities, First Nation governments, not-for-profit entities, provincial entities providing municipal-type services, and public-sector bodies wholly owned by a municipality. Eligible project categories include community centres, recreation centres, cultural centres, tourism facilities, parks, trails, libraries, and other existing community infrastructure assets that have a local community impact such as roads and water/wastewater infrastructure. Any of the above mentioned eligible recipients is able to submit as many projects as they wish, although they must prioritize their projects through resolution if they are submitting more than one project. There is no cap on the amount of funding any single organization may receive from the CIIF, although the maximum funding available for any single project is $1M. The CIIF will fund a maximum of 50% of any eligible project costs, although priority may be given to projects that require a CIIF contribution of only 33.3%. For illustrative purposes only, staff have calculated the allocation for Kitchener if the CIIF were to be split on a per capita basis. This calculation is provided merely to provide some context for council as there is no indication that the CIIF will be split on this basis. According to the Government of Ontario’s Ministry of Finance, Ontario’s estimated population on July 1, 2011 was 13.4 million people. Kitchener’s population is approximately 235,000 people. Using these numbers, if Ontario’s $49.6M allocation the CIIF were split on a per capita basis, Kitchener would receive approximately $900,000. The City of Kitchener’s portion of this would be less than half if the Region of Waterloo and other qualifying organizations within Kitchener were successful in their applications to the CIIF. Eligible project costs include consulting, construction and public announcement costs incurred between April 1, 2012 and March 31, 2014. Failure to substantially complete a project by March 31, 2014 may mean that the funding from CIIF is reduced or completely cancelled. The application deadline to the CIIF is August 24, 2012, and while no specific date is provided for when announcements of successful projects will be made, the CIIF documentation does indicate that the intention is to have contribution agreements put in place quickly and efficiently so that available funds can flow to projects as soon as possible. This report recommends projects and the associated priority order to be submitted by the City of Kitchener for consideration of the CIIF. It also recommends the endorsement of a trail project which spans the borders of Kitchener and Waterloo and will be submitted by the Region of Waterloo under the CIIF. Finally, it authorizes staff to sign a form required by the CIIF for any project being proposed by another organization to be completed on a City of Kitchener facility. For instance, staff are aware that the Centre in the Square is intending to submit three projects. REPORT: In the face of an economic slowdown, the Government of Canada has employed a number of different tactics to keep the Canadian economy strong. One of these tactics is to provide funding to improve the state of public infrastructure. The Infrastructure Stimulus Fund (ISF) is one program of this nature, while CIIF is the latest example. Compared with the ISF, the CIIF is ê ó î more of a short term stimulus program and is also focused more on recreation and culture facilities. In preparing recommendations for this report, staff reviewed the guidelines provided regarding the CIIF, the 10-year 2012 capital budget forecast, and other masterplans/studies/reports that have been presented to council subsequent to the approval of the 2012 budget. The Corporate Leadership Team reviewed the list of projects versus the CIIF guidelines and provided direction regarding the prioritization of projects to be recommended for submission to the CIIF. Below is a listing of the criteria that will be used to evaluate projects for the CIIF followed by a summary of each project being recommended for submission to the CIIF. CIIF Evaluation Criteria Incrementality 1.: All applicants will be required to attest that the work to be undertaken is an incremental construction activity that would not otherwise have been constructed by March 31, 2014, were it not for funding from the CIIF. Economic Benefits to Community 2.: Applicants will be required to identify the community benefits of completing the project. Technology and Innovation 3.: All projects will be assessed on the use of innovative technologies, new techniques, processes or materials used in the project. Partnerships 4.: All projects will be assessed on the extent to which community-based partnerships have been formed for the use of the facility. Project Readiness 5.: All projects will need to provide information to determine if the project is construction-ready and likely to be substantially completed by March 31, 2014. Extent to which Other Funding is Leveraged 6.: The ability for a given project to leverage 66.6% of project funding from other sources may be considered when making project decisions. Summary of City of Kitchener Projects for CIIF Submission Each of the summary tables below provides highlight information regarding each of the projects being recommended for submission to the CIIF. One of the criteria for submission to CIIF is incrementality. All of the projects being recommended by staff for consideration by the CIIF are in addition to the existing budgeted capital program for 2013-2014. This means that all of the projects meet this criterion, so it has not been repeated in each of the summary tables below. As well, in order to maximize the possibility of success with the CIIF, the Corporate Leadership Team recommends that all City of Kitchener projects be submitted asking for only 33.3% CIIF funding rather than the maximum amount of 50%. This is based on the wording in the CIIF guidelines regarding the possibility of projects being given priority status if the CIIF only needs to fund 33.3% of the eligible costs. This has been reflected in each of the summary tables below. Following the summary tables for each of the City’s proposed projects, is a brief description about the Regional trail project that staff are recommending be endorsed by council. ê ó í Priority1 Project NameCentennial Stadium Track Project SummaryRemove old degraded track and field facility and upgrade with new. Project RationaleCentennial Stadium Track and Field was built in 1967 and provided the city and the region with a facility for all to use and enjoy. Over time the facility could not meet the needs or the demands placed on it and cannot be used as it once was. Community BenefitsThe track and field facility was the home to national, provincial and local meets that required an eight lane track and field facilities. Local groups must travel outside the community to use similar facilities that should be available to them within a community with a population 235,000 people. Technology & InnovationWith today's new track and field surfacing, the facility will be able to meet the needs of more users while withstanding the elements within our seasonal changes. PartnershipsThe City of Kitchener has had many discussions regarding field partnerships with the number of track clubs within the city. As well, a new upgraded track and field facility would meet the needs of the school boards that are seeking a central location to mitigate transportation time, fuel and associated costs. Project ReadinessThe project could be completed by the end of 2013. Project CostsTotal CostCity Cost (66.6%)CIIF Cost (33.3%) $1,000,000$667,000333,000 Priority2 Project NameCentennial Stadium Field Project SummaryRemove existing grass field and replace with synthetic turf. Project RationaleCentennial Stadium was built in 1967 to meet the needs of the growing community. Over the next forty-five years, the field has serviced the community but is not meeting the expectations of the many users including track and field, football, rugby, soccer and other shoulder sports within the community such as cricket. Community BenefitsThe field provides economic benefit through user fees but provides the city with a venue that is accessible for many major and minor events to come to the city. The events include local, provincial and national tournaments. By converting from grass to synthetic turf, the hours of use transforms from 450 hours to a minimum of 2800 hours of potential use. Technology & InnovationThe synthetic field offers many more available times to groups that have not had access previously to the best fields. The synthetic turf allows for continuous use during wet conditions that would have shut down grass fields, including the early spring and late fall times where grass field would be unplayable. PartnershipsThe need for the fields provides the City partnerships with the local minor football associations, rugby association as well as the school boards. Many other local minor sports affiliated groups would ê ó ì welcome the opportunities at this location. Project ReadinessThe project could be completed by the end of 2013. Project CostsTotal CostCity Cost (66.6%)CIIF Cost (33.3%) $1,350,000$900,000$450,000 Priority3 Project NameAsphalt Surfacing for Primary Trails Project SummaryAsphalt surfacing of 3 km of existing granular surfaced trail at Hearth Green - Lakeside Park and Henry Strum Greenway. Project RationaleThe trail system represents a portion of a larger recreational and natural open space corridor from which several major community trail systems branch. Paving the existing granular surfaced trail will increase the accessibility and usability of the trail to a larger number of potential trail users, including wheelchairs, baby stroller, cyclists, or roller blades. An asphalt surface will also mean that winter maintenance of the trail becomes a feasible and important aspect since the trail serves as a convenient connection for residents to schools and retail centres. Community BenefitsTrails provide many potential economic benefits to the users and the communities. Generally, hiking and walking trails are affordable forms of recreation. By improving the surface of the trail, greater accessibility and usability is recognized by the community. Technology & InnovationToday's trail user demand instant access to trail mapping and educational material through the use of smart phones and other portable units. Trail surface improvements may include the development of upgraded trail signage with matrix barcodes or web site links can provide fast access to up to date trail information. PartnershipsN/A Project ReadinessThe project could be completed by the end of 2013. Project CostsTotal CostCity Cost (66.6%)CIIF Cost (33.3%) $500,000$333,000$167,000 Priority4 Project NameUpgrades to Trail System Project SummaryExpansion and upgrades of approximately 5 km of the public trail system (Doon South, Shoemaker Greenway, Huron Natural Area, TransCanada, Stanley Park) Project RationaleThrough various public studies, the community trail system continues to rank as one of the highest demanded facilities in the municipality. Identified in the Trails Master Plan (2012), the Doon South, Shoemaker Greenway, TransCanada and Stanley Park trail segments have been shown as priority multi-use pathways to be completed in the short-term. The Huron Natural Area, the city’s largest significant natural area also requires extension of the ê ó ë existing trail network to meet the ongoing use and demand. Community BenefitsTrail upgrades within greenways increase the natural beauty of neighbouhoods and stimulate recreation, leading to a more active and healthy community. There is a significant health and fitness benefit as most recreation activities on trails involve exercise, lending to many economic spin offs from trail use by local businesses. Technology & InnovationToday's trail user demand instant access to trail mapping and educational material through the use of smart phones and other portable units. Upgrades to the trail system may include the development of trail signage with matrix barcodes or web site links can provide fast access to up to date trail information. PartnershipsN/A Project ReadinessThe project could be completed by the end of 2013. Project CostsTotal CostCity Cost (66.6%)CIIF Cost (33.3%) $1,500,000$1,000,000$500,000 Priority5 Project NamePlaystructure Replacements Project SummaryReplacement of aged neighbourhood park playstructures for Westwood, Knollwood, Briethaupt, Greengable, Meinzinger, Cedarhill, Pioneer, Prospect & Kiwanis Parks. Project RationaleMany of the city's playstructures are beyond their 20 year life-cycle and need replacement or upgrades. The City has over 140 playstructures and has only been able to replace approximately 4 annually (currently on a 30 plus year life-cycle). By accelerating funding, much needed replacements would assist in bringing safe, quality playstructure into local neighbourhood parks. Community BenefitsPlaygrounds are vital for a child's cognitive, emotional, physical, and social development. Technology & InnovationInnovated play systems are designed utilizing the latest computer- aided technology in order to provide a safe and engaging play experience. PartnershipsN/A Project ReadinessThe project could be completed by the end of 2013. Project CostsTotal CostCity Cost (66.6%)CIIF Cost (33.3%) $570,000$380,000$190,000 Priority6 Project NameKnollwood Park Rehabilitation Project Project SummaryRehabilitation of Knollwood Park, an aged inner city park through public engagement. Project RationaleThe Parks Strategic Plan (2010) identified that parks within our central neighbouhoods are in need of immediate or short term upgrades or investment. The Knollwood Park residents have been consulting with the city staff for appropriate park facility upgrades and site layout alternatives. Community BenefitsA local or neighbourhood park is a focal point to the neighbourhood ê ó ê bringing together social interaction through various park activities. Technology & InnovationThe park rehabilitation project will include computer-aided design to develop park concept alternatives for review by the neighbourhood representatives. PartnershipsPartnership with local neighbourhood association Project ReadinessThe project could be completed by the end of 2013. Project CostsTotal CostCity Cost (66.6%)CIIF Cost (33.3%) $200,000$133,000$67,000 Priority7 Project NameVictoria Park Washrooms Project SummaryRenovation/Expansion to create additional public washrooms in the park. Project RationalePublic use of the park has steadily increased. Currently, public washrooms only exist on one side of the park. There is a need for additional washrooms and a need to better accommodate accessibility. Community BenefitsThe addition of washroom amenities will have an impact of drawing more people, year round, to the downtown. Technology & InnovationThe renovated washrooms will include energy efficient lighting and automated water fixtures to ensure water conservation. PartnershipsN/A Project ReadinessConceptual designs are developed. Public consultation is currently underway. Recommendation and design will be finalized in early fall. Depending on final location in the park, heritage design aspects and approval may be required, affecting cost and timelines. Project CostsTotal CostCity Cost (66.6%)CIIF Cost (33.3%) $400,000$267,000$133,000 Waterloo Spur Line Multi Use Trail At the announcement of the CIIF, City of Kitchener staff were contacted by staff at the Region of Waterloo regarding the potential inclusion of the Waterloo Spur Line Multi Use Trail. This project would see the implementation of a multi-use trail within the Region of Waterloo’s rail corridor joining Kitchener from Weber Street to Waterloo at Caroline Street. The total estimated cost for the project is $2.5M. Based on discussions with Region of Waterloo staff, City of Kitchener staff estimate that the City’s share of this project in the range of $600,000 minus the funding provided by the CIIF. ALIGNMENT WITH CITY OF KITCHENER STRATEGIC PLAN: Foundation: Efficient and Effective Government Goal: Financial Management Strategic Direction: Strive for competitive, rational and affordable taxation levels Under a grant program such as the CIIF, the City of Kitchener is able to leverage City funding to do more work than if the City were required to completely fund the project on its own. ê ó é FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS: The City will be required to fund its portion of any project chosen to be funded through the CIIF. A portion of the parks and trails projects could be funded out of general provisions included in the 10 year capital forecast. As well, if the ongoing LEAF consultation were to show that trails were a priority to the community, funding could be provided from the LEAF reserve fund. Finally, the Recreational Land Reserve Fund could be used to fund the City’s share of project costs. The Planning Act outlines that this reserve fund may be used for the development or redevelopment of and purchase of parkland, which would fit with any of the projects being recommended for submission to the CIIF. The current balance in this reserve fund is $2.1M. As was presented as part of the Reserve Fund policy approved by council earlier this year, one of the purposes of holding funding in reserve is to leverage funding programs from other orders of government without impacting the tax rate. COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT: Not applicable. ACKNOWLEDGED BY: Dan Chapman, Deputy CAO (Finance and Corporate Services) ê ó è