HomeMy WebLinkAboutDTS-08-076 - Strategic Disposition of City-Owned Lands
)
c,_>
KITCHENER
Development &
Technical Services
,..
Report To:
Date of Meeting:
Submitted By:
Prepared By:
Ward(s) Involved:
Date of Report:
Report No.:
Subject:
Mayor and Members of Council
October 6,2008 (Strategy Session)
Jeff Will mer, Director of Planning
Cynthia Fletcher, Director of Facilities Management (519-741-
2424 )
Jeff Will mer, Director of Planning (519-741-2325)
Jim Witmer, Director of Operations (519-741-2657)
All
September 22, 2008
DTS-08-076
RECOMMENDATION:
Strategic Disposition of City-Owned Lands
That staff be directed to prepare a prioritized list of City-owned lands for Council's
consideration as surplus to the City's needs, with a report to be scheduled for
Development & Technical Services Committee no later than December 2008; and further,
That higher priority be given to those City-owned lands from which the sale and
development of the property will achieve one or more significant community benefits.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
There are a number of City-owned properties which are not developed or improved, and for
which there are no plans for development or improvement. These lands expose the City to
liability, and require ongoing maintenance costs. Their sale would remove the maintenance
costs and liability, create positive opportunities for infill development, allow the City to establish
green building standards and/or urban design principles for resulting development, and
generate revenue from the proceeds of sale which would be reinvested in community benefits.
In 2005 Council considered the issue of retaining versus disposing of parkland. The resulting
resolution states that, as a general principle, City-owned parkland should be retained and not
disposed of. This report is consistent with that intent in that the lands which would be listed are
undeveloped lands which are either not improved as parkland or would qualify as exceptional
circumstances.
BACKGROUND:
The City of Kitchener owns a variety of undeveloped properties which fail to achieve the City's
environmental objectives. However, if they are determined to be surplus to City needs, the sale
of such undeveloped lands could realize many of these objectives.
In order to prioritize staff's efforts in the preparation of business cases and the undertaking of
public consultations, it is preferable to have Council direction on priority sites.
REPORT:
There are several public policy objectives that are advanced by the disposition of surplus lands.
· Most properties which may be considered surplus are within the built-up area of the
community. Infill development of such lands makes use of existing infrastructure,
and reduces the need to expand the community outwards where new operating and
maintenance costs would otherwise be incurred.
· The disposition of surplus lands removes a maintenance obligation now being
incurred by the City.
· The sale of surplus lands generates revenue for reinvestment in public services. If
the revenue is invested in the Asset Management Reserve Fund, as set out in Policy 1-
727 (copy attached), it would be used for strategic property purchase or other
community benefits. If invested in the Park Trust fund it would be used for parks and
open space, including acquisition of land and installation or improvement of facilities. If
invested in the Local Environmental Action Fund it could be catalyst funding for a
wide range of projects having
· With the City as vendor, conditions of sale may be put in place to ensure that one or
more of the following community benefits are achieved (these may be specified in a
Request For Proposals or similar process):
Expectations for high quality urban design to ensure that new development
makes a positive contribution to the existing community context; and,
Green building certification requirements (e.g., "LEED") so that new buildings
or neighbourhoods contribute to environmentally sustainable development.
· Subsequent development of lands generates one or more of the following benefits:
Contributes to urban revitalization, adding to resident population to support
local shops and services within walking distance;
Improves community safety by establishing a greater population of residents to
provide "eyes on the street" or on other public space, and increases the critical
mass of people out using the streets and public spaces;
Helps partially built neighbourhoods become complete neighbourhoods (e.g.,
by increasing school-age population to reach threshold required to build a new
elementary school in the neighbourhood; supporting the provision of
neighbourhood amenities such as convenience store, dry cleaner, bank,
pharmacy, etc.)
Generates tax revenue where none is being generated now; and,
Cleans up contamination on brownfield lands, reducing risk to public health and
ground water quality.
Consistent with Council's April 2005 resolution, the priority sites which would be recommended
are warranted because:
· the sites are not improved as parkland;
· there is no intention to use the sites for any municipal purpose;
· the supply of public open space within the area is acceptable to meet the existing and
anticipated needs of the community; and,
· the revenue generated from sale should be reinvested in community benefits, including
parks and open space.
This report is the first step of a three-step process. If there is direction to proceed, Step 2 would
be preparation and consideration of a staff report identifying potential sites in order of priority.
Step 3 would be a public meeting to decide whether one or more top priority sites should be
declared as surplus, including community input on the merits of each site.
FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS:
The sale of surplus lands will generate one-time revenue from the proceeds of the sale.
Subsequent development by private interests will generate ongoing tax revenue. If the City
continues to own such parcels, not only are these revenues foregone, but we continue to have
the responsibilities of any property owner including liability, as well as operating and
maintenance costs.
Policy 1-727 directs that the net proceeds from the sale of City land be allocated to the Asset
Management Reserve Fund and provides for certain classes of land which are excluded from
the policy. The Step 2 report would recommend on a case-by-case basis whether sale
proceeds should be allocated to the Asset Management Reserve Fund for reinvestment in the
community, or an alternative such as the Park Trust Fund for reinvestment in park and open
space improvement, or LEAF as catalyst funding for projects having a community environmental
benefit.
COMMUNICATIONS:
n/a at this point. At such time as priorities are identified in Step 2, Council's consideration of
lands as potentially surplus (Step 3) would be held in an open meeting, and the immediate
community would be given the opportunity to provide input on specific properties.
CONCLUSION:
The strategic disposition of certain City-owned lands would promote community sustainability,
finance much-needed reinvestment in community infrastructure, and promote development in a
manner that supports the healthy community principles of social vitality, economic prosperity
and environmental viability.
Jeff Will mer,
Director of Planning
Cynthia Fletcher,
Director of Facilities Management
Jim Witmer,
Director of Operations