HomeMy WebLinkAboutCAO-16-017 - 11 Young StreetKiTCH N
Staff Report
CA0 Office
www.kitchener ca
REPORT TO:
Committee of the Whole
DATE OF MEETING:
May 16, 2016
SUBMITTED BY:
Rod Regier, Executive Director of Economic Development
(519) 741 -2200 ext. 7506
PREPARED BY:
Cory Bluhm, Manager of Downtown Development
(519) 741 -2200 ext. 7065
WARD (S) INVOLVED:
9&10
DATE OF REPORT:
May 10, 2016
REPORT NO.:
CAO -16 -017
SUBJECT:
11 Young Street
RECOMMENDATION:
That the Mayor and Clerk be authorized to enter into an agreement for the use of 11
Young Street as a temporary City operated public space, with said agreement to be to
the satisfaction of the City Solicitor.
That the City implement a temporary public space on 11 Young Street, as per Option 3
of report CAO -16 -017.
BACKGROUND:
King Street and Civic Square are the city's central gathering place for festivals, civic
engagements and tourist visits. During the week, the area is frequented by thousands of
downtown employees and business patrons.
As a result of the demolition of the former Mayfair Hotel, the lands at 11 Young Street sit
vacant. By law, the owner is only required to secure the site and maintain it to the standards
prescribed by the City's Property Standards Bylaw. While the property owner's intention is to
redevelop the site, it will likely remain in its current state during this interim time period. As a
condition of the demolition permit, the property owner is required to complete the finish grading
including the installation of grass or another suitable ground treatment.
Staff and Councillors have received comments from the public and the downtown business
community wishing to see this site not remain in its current state, but to be used for some form
of public space until such time as a redevelopment occurs.
* ** This information is available in accessible formats upon request. * **
Please call 519- 741 -2345 or TTY 1- 866 - 969 -9994 for assistance.
4. -1
REPORT:
City staff explored a series of options for addressing the visual condition of 11 Young Street
and options for the property to become a temporary public space:
Option 1 — Remain as Is
The site in its current state would satisfy this standard. However, in the mind of the public, the
site would remain an eye sore and could not be used for public use.
The City could install wood fencing /hoarding along the perimeter of the site. This would cost
an estimated at $9,500. If the City were to paint the fencing or install a mural, for example,
additional costs would be incurred. While this option would address the visual concerns, it
would not enable any public use.
Option 2 — Grassed Site, Owner Controlled
As part of Council's deliberations on the demolition application in 2015, the property owner
indicated a willingness to pursue sodding or seeding the site. However, there are two primary
challenges with this option which render it infeasible.
Firstly, it is the professional opinion of the City's Supervisor of Parks and Horticulture, an
expert in turf management, that it would be difficult to grow grass on this site, especially for any
form of public use. It's a harsh growing environment due to the heat island effect generated in
the downtown (heat radiating off of the surrounding buildings, sidewalks and roads).
Significant irrigation, watering and use of fertilizer would be required — all of which would be
challenging to implement given the lack of an onsite water source. To enable grass to grow,
the site would have to be fenced off for a lengthy period of time to avoid daily wear and tear
from citizens using or passing through the site.
Secondly, the property owner is reluctant to assume the liability associated with public
activities that could occur on these lands if left unfenced. This is a common concern anytime
private property is to be used for what appears to be an open public purpose. Even if the site
could be grassed, and remained fenced off, it would still invite public or unwanted use which
exposes the property owner to liability.
Based on the foregoing, staff do not feel a grass surface is feasible nor the proper solution for
a publicly accessible space.
Option 3 (Recommended) — Temporary, City- Operated Public Space
Based on the challenges of Option 2, a more achievable solution would be for the City to
operate the land as a temporary public space. The City would enter into an agreement with
the owner for use of the property and assume the risk associated with any public use.
Note - based on the site drainage and condition of the adjoining wall, the current drainage
swale on the easterly portion of the lot needs to remain. As such, only the flat westerly portion
4. -2
of the lot could be utilized for public space. The remainder of the lot (the swale) would need to
be fenced off and remain under the care and liability of the property owner.
Under this scenario, the City would install a cost - effective public space consisting of a base
surface material and moveable assets (eg: planter pots, picnic tables, patio furniture, armour
stone, etc.) most of which would be redeployed from the City's existing inventory and retained
by the City once the site redevelops. The site would look like a "pop -up" public space.
Cost of this option is estimated at approximately $60,000 - $70,000. Staff would work to
minimize the overall costs of building the space.
Option 4 — Fully Developed, City- Operated Public Space
Similar to option 3, the City could enter into an agreement for the use of the lands. In this
case, the City would install a more permanent public space, which typically includes concrete
or paving stone materials, structured planting beds, trees planted in the ground, etc. Given the
urban context of the site, lighting and irrigation would normally be required. In this instance,
most of the features could not be redeployed to other spaces, and would be lost costs at the
time of redevelopment.
Cost of this option would be estimated at anywhere between $100,000 to $200,000, depending
on a variety of factors (the quality of finishes, lighting requirements, irrigation requirements,
etc.). Given the uncertainty of the life span of this public space, it is possible that such a
significant investment might only be utilized for 1 -2 years. This type of space would also
require a significant design and tendering process, and would be difficult to implement in 2016.
For these reasons, staff recommend against this option.
Either of options 2, 3 and 4 would satisfy the outstanding condition of the demolition permit.
Recommended Temporary Public Space Concept
Staff have developed a concept which represents the most cost - effective option for use as a
temporary public space (see Appendix A). Various surface materials were investigated,
including asphalt, stone dust, grass and wood chips. Of these, asphalt would provide the most
cost effective and easily maintained surface. The asphalt would be painted to add colour to
the space.
While other materials may be more affordable, given the high volume of potential users, they
are difficult to maintain. Wood chips, for example, would quickly become soiled. As explained
in Option 2, growing grass would be challenging at best given the harsh growing environment
and the trampling of grass during festivals and daily pedestrian traffic. It is likely that all of
these factors would result in dead or worn grass and potentially muddy conditions during wet
weather.
In addition to the asphalt surface, staff would outfit the space with moveable furnishings (bistro
tables, picnic tables, etc.) and trees would be planted in moveable planters. Many of these
4. -3
furnishings are already within the City's inventory. A small planting bed would be installed on
the northern side of the space to add elements of green, using sustainable, drought resistant
plantings, such as low- maintenance ornamental grasses.
Programming
The Downtown Kitchener BIA has agreed to leave 5 wooden huts on site for the City to
incorporate into programming. These huts, combined with a programmable hard surface,
would allow the space to be used for small, market -style programming. The City would
actively program the space during the week, and make the space available to festival
organizers.
Operations
The nature of the recommended concept will require limited additional operating demands.
Work would be integrated into the functions of existing teams, in particular, the Downtown
Clean Team. The space would be actively monitored seasonally from late -May until mid -
October.
Opportunity to Encourage Neighbourhood Placemaking
The City's Strategic Plan (Safe and Thriving Neighbourhoods), Neighbourhood Matching
Funds Grant, Official Plan and Economic Development Strategy all promote the creation of
citizen led placemaking, by turning under - utilized public spaces into active and vibrant spaces.
Based on initial public input, it is anticipated that the future Neighbourhood Strategy will include
a focus on this form of placemaking. Not only will this space be activated by the community at
times, it will provide an example of what a "pop -up" or temporary park could be and how these
types of spaces could be used.
ALIGNMENT WITH CITY OF KITCHENER STRATEGIC PLAN:
The use of 11 Young as a temporary public space supports the City's strategic priority for
building safe and thriving neighbourhoods, as the proposed design will enable active
community use, events and weekly programming. Specifically, strategic item 3.6 recommends
providing opportunities for citizens to create active and vibrant public places.
The City's Official Plan supports opportunities for place- making and encourages the use of
publicly accessible spaces to be programmed with arts, cultural and event programing to
create vibrant people places.
The City's Economic Development Strategy seeks to embrace new urban amenities, such as
pop -up parks.
FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS:
Staff estimate the cost of implementing the recommended temporary public space to be
approximately $60,000 - $70,000. Staff would work to minimize the overall costs of installing
the space.
C�11I
This projected would be funded through existing capital accounts, including Economic
Development's Downtown Improvements account and the Planning Division's Urban Design
Improvements account. The Downtown Improvement account is used annually for the
purchasing of streetscape related elements, such as benches, flower pots, bike racks, trees,
etc. The City would redeploy any moveable assets after redevelopment. The Urban Design
Improvements account is utilized for strategic design interventions often aimed at
streetscapes, placemaking or enhancements to the public realm. This initiative is aligned with
the Planning Division's urban design and civic vitality objectives. Since this account often uses
a partnership arrangement, sufficient funds have been reserved for such a joint placemaking
project with Economic Development. Generally speaking, costs would be shared equally
between the two accounts.
The property owner has agreed to provide use of the site to the City at no cost, and will incur
costs associated with removal of asphalt at the time of redevelopment. The property owner
also intends to paint the adjoining wall at his expense, and would allow the City to reuse the
existing fence currently on site.
COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT:
INFORM — This report will be posted to the City's website with the agenda in advance of the
Council meeting.
ENGAGE — If implemented, the City will work with event organizers and community groups to
activate the space.
CONCLUSION:
Given the public interest in seeing the lands at 11 Young Street become a programmable
public space, the proposed plan would enable such use adding vitality to a site that otherwise
will sit empty until it is redeveloped.
ACKNOWLEDGED BY: Jeff Willmer, CAO
Enclosures:
Appendix A: Proposed Concept
4. -5
y
4. -6