HomeMy WebLinkAboutCAO-06-043 - Results of Central Library & Centre Block Redevelopment Public Consultations1
Ki~~rER - •
~hiefAdministraror's
Off)ce
Report To: Finance and Corporate Services Committee
Date of Meeting : June 26, 2006
Submitted By: Carla Ladd, CAO; Michael May, Senior Public Affairs Officer
Prepared By: Carla Ladd, CAO; Michael May, Senior Public Affairs Officer
Ward(s) Involved: All
Date of Report: June 21, 2006
Report No.: CAO-06-043
Subject: RESULTS OF CENTRAL LIBRARY AND CENTRE BLOCK
REDEVELOPMENT PUBLIC CONSULTATIONS
RECOMMENDATION:
Recognizing that the clear majority of Kitchener residents or property owners who participated in
the City's three phased public consultation process indicated they do not want to proceed with
the current proposal to build a new central library on Centre Block, it is recommended that:
1. Staff develop a request for proposals (RFP) for the redevelopment of Centre Block
that does not require the construction of a new central library and uses the significant
amount of public input the City has received to date to establish clear expectations
for the types of development that will be considered for the block.
2. Staff share and discuss the detailed public feedback received during the three-
phased citizen engagement process with KPL so that the library board can determine
the best way for it to proceed with addressing its future needs.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
In March 2006, as City Council prepared to make a decision on how to proceed with the
proposal to build a new central library on Centre Block, it began to receive an increased amount
of public feedback on the projects. As a result of that increased public interest, on March 20,
City Council passed a motion calling on staff to develop a full public consultation process so that
Council would have the benefit of more citizen feedback before making a decision.
On April 24, after several consultations between City staff and the Finance and Corporate
Services Committee to work out some of the details of a citizens' forum, City Council approved
a three phased public consultation process aimed at getting feedback from as many citizens as
possible through a variety of avenues.
The three phases of the public consultations were:
^ Phase 1: Pre-Forum Citizen Consultations (comment received by phone, online or mail)
^ Phase 2: Citizens' Town Hall Meeting (May 23)
^ Phase 3: Citizens' Panel Discussions (May 30)
All combined, 386 citizens participated in the public consultation process. A clear majority of
residents who participated in the process indicated they do not want the City to proceed with the
proposal to build a new central library on Centre Block.
Through the public consultation process, a number of alternatives to the current proposal were
suggested by citizens that deserve thorough consideration by KPL. These alternatives included:
^ expanding the library laterally on its current site;
^ partnering with one of the universities or neighbouring municipalities;
^ considering alternative downtown locations which were not originally examined because
they were not on the market several years ago, and;
^ focusing on the needs of a library in the ever increasing era of information technology.
In addition to this public feedback, City staff has reason to believe that the market conditions in
downtown Kitchener have changed significantly since 2002 when it was first recommended that
an economic catalyst such as a library was needed to attract a private sector partner to
redevelop the Centre Block.
Recently, Kitchener's downtown has been experiencing a significant momentum ingrowth which
staff believe the City should capitalize on by moving quickly to issue an RFP for the
redevelopment of the Centre Block. Given that much of the background and detail work has
already been completed, staff believe that the RFP can be completed in draft form for Council's
consideration by late summer 2006.
Given the clear majority of public comments against proceeding with the proposal to build a new
central library on the Centre Block, the shift in market conditions in the downtown, and the
potential alternative suggestions made by citizens which merit further investigation by KPL, staff
is recommending the central library and Centre Block redevelopment projects be separated
from one another and that staff prepare an RFP for the redevelopment of Centre Block for
Council's consideration based on the following general timeline:
Staff prepare draft RFP (based on public feedback received to date). Summer 2006
Present draft RFP to City Council for consideration. Late summer 2006
* Issue RFP (subject to Council approval). Early fall 2006
* Receive proposals from private sector. Fall -late Dec. 06
Public consultations on top 2-3 proposals based on matrix evaluation
assumin ro osals are received which meet RFP criteria 2007
Council consideration of top 2-3 proposals (including public feedback). 2007
* It is important to note that issuing the RFP would not tie the City's hands to accepting
any of the proposals submitted.
If the City does not receive any proposals from the private sector which meet its criteria (which
will be clearly laid out in the RFP) and which are deemed by City Council to be the right fit for
the community, it is under no obligation to accept any of the proposals.
Additionally, if the new City Council, which will be elected in November 2006, should wish to
change any aspects of the RFP to better reflect their collective vision for the Centre Block
redevelopment, it could say no to any proposals received in 2006, revise the RFP in January
2007, and reissue it at that time.
Staff believe strongly that the City should move quickly to issue an RFP for the redevelopment
of Centre Block to capitalize on the emerging downtown market and let the private sector come
forward with proposals for Council consideration. However, staff believe just as strongly that we
need to be patient and wait for the right proposal. If the initial RFP is unsuccessful in finding the
right proposal, it should be issued again, at a later date, when market conditions in the
downtown have improved even further. In effect, staff are suggesting that we keep trying until
we find the `perfect fit.'
BACKGROUND:
In the late 1990s, many areas of Kitchener's downtown were in distress. The Centre Block was
particularly problematic and had attracted a number of negative uses to the downtown.
After exhausting several other options to deal with the negative uses on Centre Block, between
1999 and 2001, the City of Kitchener began to purchase a number of the properties and
businesses on the block. The City's objective at that time was to increase its chances of finding
a private sector partner who would redevelop this important piece of the downtown.
In 2001, the City pursued a private sector interest to redevelop the Forsyth building. The City
supported that proposal by guaranteeing the mortgage. Unfortunately, market conditions in the
downtown did not support the redevelopment at that time. As a result, the private developer
defaulted on the mortgage and the City became the owner of the Forsyth building.
Now owning a larger piece of the Centre Block, the City became more aggressive about
pursuing redevelopment. After consulting with the development industry, as well as downtown
businesses and residents, the City issued atwo-stage RFP. Only four proposals were received,
none of which met the City requirements for the block.
In 2002, the Centre Block Committee reviewed several options on how to proceed. Given the
difficult market conditions that existed in downtown Kitchener at that time, the Centre Block
committee concluded that in order to attract a private sector partner to redevelop Centre Block,
the City would need to include an economic catalyst on the block. After learning that the
Kitchener Public Library (KPL) was working on a proposal for a new central library, a
partnership was born and a combined KPL /Centre Block Project Committee was created.
In 2004, City Council approved the creation of the $110 million Economic Development
Investment Fund (EDIF) and notionally allocated $32.5 million to a new central library project on
Centre Block. As a result, momentum to redevelop the Centre Block began to accelerate.
Between August 2005 and January 2006, the KPL l Centre Block Project Committee held
regular, open, public meetings to further refine the proposal to build the central library on the
Centre Block through a P3 (Public Private Partnership) process.
As City Council came closer to making a decision on how to proceed with the projects, it began
to receive more and more public feedback. Several questions began to arise around the cost of
the project, the need for a new central library given increasing public access to the Internet,
whether or not Centre Block still needed an economic catalyst to attract a private sector partner,
and the proposal P3 process. In March 2006, City Council called for a pause on the projects in
order to receive further public input on how to proceed.
REPORT:
Summary of Public Consultation Process:
Between April 14, 2006 and May 30, 2006, the City of Kitchener received 386 comments as part
of its three-phased public consultations on the central library and Centre Block redevelopment
projects.
Citizens' Panel Discussion
The 19 member Citizens' Panel, which met on May 30t" to discuss the projects, was not able to
come to a consensus on whether or not the City needs a new central library. It also did not
reach consensus on whether or not the Centre Block is the best location for any potential new
library. The 19 member Citizens' Panel did reach a consensus on:
^ A strong central library is critical.
^ Library services need to be expanded.
^ There needs to be a redefinition of what a library is ... to include a broad offering of services.
^ A strong central library is the anchor to a strong branch system.
^ Kitchener needs an improved and enhanced central library.
Summary of All 386 Public Comments
Staff believe that the result of the Citizens' Panel is representative of the split in opinion within
the community on how to proceed with these projects. This is not surprising given the
complexity of the projects, the significant number of related issues and the cost.
However, while the 19 member Citizens' Panel could not reach a consensus on how to proceed,
when taking a more inclusive approach to examining all of the public feedback received through
all three phases, a clear majority of the citizens who participated in the consultation process
indicated they do not want the City to proceed with the current proposal. Below is a statistical
summary of the input received during all three phases of the consultation as prepared by staff.
1. Do we need a new central library?
Yes No Undecided
Phasel 84 252 2
Phase 2 10 10 1
* Phase 3 9 16 2
Total # of Res onses 103 278 5
Total % of All Res onses 26.7% 72% 1.3%
* Phase 3 includes comments from the public which were received at the beginning of the May
30t" meeting in addition to the positions of the citizen panellists as noted by the facilitators.
2. If we need a new central library, is the Centre Block the best location?
"Yes" to A New
Library and "Yes" to "No" to
Provided Specific Centre Block Centre Block
Comment on the
Issue of Location
Phase 1 70 60 10
Phase 2 9 4 5
Phase 3 9 7 0
Total # of Res onses 88 71 15
Total % of All 386 Res onses 22.8% 18.4% 3.9%
Of the 103 people who said "yes" we need a new central library, 88 made a specific comment
on the issue of where the library should be located. 71 of those 88 comments said "yes" the
Centre Block is the best location. Therefore, when considering all of the 386 comments
received, 71 comments, or 18.4% said "yes" we need a new central library and "yes" Centre
Block is the best location.
It is important to note that the number of people who said "yes" to a new central library and
specifically commented on the issue of whether Centre Block is the best location was relatively
low at 88. This may be due in part to the fact the residents considered both projects as one
proposal and did not feel they needed to comment on the location. Given this low sample size it
is probably unwise to draw any strong conclusions from this statistic on its own.
It is also important to note that in reviewing, analyzing and compiling a summary of the public
comments, when a comment did not explicitly say "yes" or "no" to a specific question, staff used
their judgement to determine the answer when the comments clearly indicated a preference.
Chan_ginq Market Conditions in Downtown Kitchener:
Today, evidence has begun to show that the market conditions in downtown Kitchener are
changing for the better, due in part to decisions and investments City Council has made in the
downtown such as the University of Waterloo's School of Pharmacy and Wilfrid Laurier
University's Lyle S. Hallman Faculty of Social Work. Other private sector developments which
have been supported by a number of City incentive programs such as the Kaufman and Arrow
Lofts are also contributing to the change in market conditions.
City staff has begun to receive an increasing number of inquiries on the potential redevelopment
of Centre Block from private developers which do not require a municipally funded economic
catalyst. However, to date, staff has not formally considered any of those inquiries because the
central library proposal was still being considered for the block.
Unlike back in 2002, when the Centre Block Committee first recommended the need for an
economic catalyst on Centre Block, it now appears that improved market conditions may allow
the City to successfully attract a private sector partner to redevelop the block.
Citizens Recommend KPL Explore Alternatives To Current Proposal:
Through the public consultation process, a number of alternatives to the current proposal for a
new central library on Centre Blockwere suggested by citizens. The suggestions include:
^ expanding the library laterally on its current site;
^ partnering with one of the universities or neighbouring municipalities;
^ considering alternative downtown locations which were not originally examined because
they were not on the market several years ago, or;
^ focusing on the needs of a library in the ever increasing era of information technology.
CONCLUSION:
Given the strong majority of public comments against proceeding with the proposal to build a
new central library on the Centre Block, the shift in market conditions and several potential
alternatives to the current proposal which have been suggested by members of the public, staff
is recommending the central library and Centre Block redevelopment projects be separated
from one another.
Separating the projects will allow the City to proceed quickly with an RFP for the redevelopment
of Centre Block in an attempt to capitalize on the growing momentum and private sector interest
in Kitchener's downtown. However, should the RFP be unsuccessful, the City can wait until
market conditions improve even further to ensure that when we finally have a successful
proposal for Centre Block, it is for the kind of development that will be best for the downtown
and for the community as a whole.
At the same time, separating the projects will allow KPL to carefully consider the public input we
have heard through the public consultation process to help the library board formulate a strategy
on how to proceed with meeting its future needs.
Carla Ladd, CAO Michael May, Senior Public Affairs Officer