The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutDTS-09-014 - Strategic Disposition of City-Owned Lands - Part 21 Kl~rc~~R Qevelo pment & Technical Services Report To: Development and Technical Service Committee Date of Meeting: March 2, 2009 Submitted By: Jeff Willmer, Interim General Manager of Development and Technical Services Prepared By: Garett Stevenson, Planning Technician, 519-741-3400 x 3158 Ward(s) Involved: All Date of Report: February 13, 2009 Report No.: DTS-09-014 Subject: Strategic Disposition of City-Owned Lands: Part 2 RECOMMENDATION: That the City-owned lands listed as Priority A in DTS Report-08-196 be identified for consideration to be declared as surplus to City's needs, and That staff be authorized to inform the general public, including adjacent landowners, as well as the Environmental Advisory Committee and other agencies, of a public information session, where staff will obtain community input on development alternatives for the subject parcels, for Council to consider when deciding on whether to declare City-owned lands as surplus to City needs, and further, That staff be authorized to notify all interested parties, including owners of property within 120 metres of all subject properties, of the date and time of the Council meeting where the decision to declare City-owned lands as surplus will be considered. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: After considering Report DTS-08-076 (copy attached) at the October 6, 2008 Strategy Session, Council directed staff to prepare a prioritized list of City-owned lands for Council's consideration as surplus to the City's needs. Higher priority was given to those City-owned lands from which the sale and development of the property will achieve one or more significant community benefits. Factsheets were prepared for 14 of the properties identified as potentially surplus lands. The properties were prioritized into three categories based on: - The benefit that potential development will contribute to an existing community, - The current use and condition of the land, - The existing social characteristics of the surrounding community, - The environmental constraints of each parcel, - The quality and type of development that could occur on each parcel, - The potential for sale conditions to satisfy development uncertainties, - The potential revenue the sale of land will generate, and 4-1 - The City's current obligation for each property, including maintenance and liability. Based on the above criteria, staff prioritized each City-owned parcel of land under consideration for declaration as surplus to City needs. Each parcel of land was prioritized as either a priority A, B, or C, with A being the highest priority for declaration as surplus lands. Factsheets which contain a summary of the issues identified by staff for each of the 14 City-owned properties are attached to this report for the Committee's review. BACKGROUND: At a special meeting of City Council held on October 6, 2008, Report DTS-08-076 was considered and the following resolution was passed: "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 and 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." Under this direction, staff has prepared a prioritized list of 14 City-owned properties which are not developed or improved, and may be considered as surplus to the City's needs. Of those 14 identified parcels, staff has identified 4 parcels of land which are recommended to be declared as surplus. 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 except in exceptional circumstances. 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. The Kiwanis Park table lands are an exceptional circumstance, and a business case has been prepared to demonstrate the rationale for declaring the lands as surplus. The business case is attached as Appendix `C'. REPORT: Staff has prepared a prioritized list of 14 City-owned properties which are not developed or improved. Of the hundreds of City-owned properties which are likely surplus to municipal needs, these 14 present the greatest potential for development. There are no plans to develop or improve the lands and they are currently being underutilized. The declaration of these lands as surplus lands to the City's needs would allow the sale and development of the parcels, which would achieve most if not all of the following: - Dissolve the ongoing obligation of the City to maintain the land, - Remove City liability concerns for these lands, - Allow for quality development in existing communities by regulating high quality urban design and/or green building certification requirements (e.g., "LEED") through conditions of sale that may be put in place by the City to ensure that such community benefits are achieved, - Make use of existing infrastructure and reduce the need to expand the community outwards where new operating and maintenance costs would otherwise be incurred, - Generate revenue for reinvestment in public services, where proceeds from the sale can be invested into funds such as the Asset Management Reserve Fund, Park Trust Fund, Local Environmental Action Fund (LEAF), etc., - Contribute to urban revitalization by adding residential population to support local shops and/or services within walking distance, - Improve community safety by increasing the critical mass of people out using the streets and public spaces, 4-2 Generate property tax revenue, and Encourage the clean up of contaminated sites thereby reducing risk to public health and ground water quality. This report begins the second step of a three~step process. If so directed, staff will hold a public information session to provide a venue far interested parties, including the citizens of the surrounding neighbourhoods, to provide comment on what features the public would like to see included in any future development if any of the top priority sites should be declared as surplus. FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS: The sale of surplus lands will generate one-time revenue from the proceeds of each 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 the City would continue to have the responsibilities of any property owner including liability, as well as operating and maintenance costs, Policy I-l~`~ 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. wring the declaration process, staff would provide a recommendation 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 transformational projects having a community environmental benefit. C~I'~MUNICATIC~NS: bane required at this time.. Staff will provide the public, including the property owners in the adjacent neighbourhoods with written ;notice of both the pubic information session and the public meeting of CommitteeiCouncil at which the lands would be considered for surplus declaration. CONCLUSION: The declaration of certain City-owned lands as surplus to Gity's needs would allow for the sale and development of currently. underutilized and underdeveloped parcels in the City, .thereby romoting community sustainability, providing onetime revenue .for reinvestment into p community infrastructure, and promoting development in a ma .er that supports the healthy community principles of social vitality, economic prosp~' ~ and environmental viability. Communit input will help inform Council's decision-makin ~~ ~~ .~ ~l / "~ a, i ."" . ,: S f ~ is 1. Gantt evensan C;nthi I ` c _ _ P in ~f °chni a ~-- Director of Facilities Managem ~~ Ilmer, Jim itmer, Dir ctor of Operations to General Manager of Development and Technical S Attachmenfis Appendix `A': Property Identification Factsheets Appendix `B': DTS 08-g7~ Appendix `C': Business Case - Kiwanis Park ent ervices 4-3 Strategic Disposition of City Lands -Property Identification Factsheets APPENDIX "A" McLENNAN PARK GATE -WEST SIDE Priority A ~: I~~ •~ mix ~_ ,, ~~ . " ~. ~• ~o -rp ~ ¢ai . • k ~ ~~ -~ ~~w ~ ~~ - Official Plan Des. Low Rise Residential Current Zoning P-2 (Open Space) Approximate Frontage 77mon Blackhorne Dr. Parcel Area 0.43 ha 1.06 acres Available Servicing -Sanitary and storm sewer can be extended from Blackhorne Drive - Water sewer from McLennan Park Gate or Blackhorne Drive - Storm servicing can also be extended from Block Line Road Environmental - No known limitations Factors Potential Value -Significant value Comments - Surplus to City needs - Significant development potential for townhouse or low-rise apartment buildings - Design new residential units to be pedestrian oriented and act as feature entrance into the community - Development will serve as a positive addition to the community Recommendation - Declaration as surplus lands - Purchaser applies for zone change - RFP should establish design and green building expectations Ward -Ward 4 -South Possible Future -Multiple dwelling units, up to 3 storey townhouses or apartment Development buildings Potential Tax -Property Tax: $20,800 Revenue -City Portion of Property Tax: $6,700 - (Assumes approximately 20 townhouse units) Estimated Current -Approximately $525 per annum Annual Maintenance Cost 4-4 Strategic Disposition of City Lands -Property Identification Fact Sheet McLENNAN PARK GATE -EAST SIDE 3 ~ ~ . ._. ~, ~,. ~ . ~- Priority A Official Plan Des. Low Rise Residential . ~ _ -~~` _ _ - r Current Zoning P-2 (Open Space) Approximate Frontage 70mon Blackhorne Dr. Parcel Area 0.31 ha 0.76 acres Available Servicing -Sanitary and storm sewer available from Blackhorne Drive - Water servicing can be extended from Blackhorne Drive Environmental - No known limitations Factors Potential Value -Significant value Comments - Surplus to City needs - Significant development potential for townhouse or low-rise apartment - Development will serve as a positive addition to the community Recommendation - Declaration as surplus lands - Purchaser applies for zone change - RFP should establish design and green building expectations - Any development should compliment any future development on the opposite side of the street Ward -Ward 4 -South Possible Future -Multiple dwelling units, up to 3 storey townhouses or apartment Development buildings Potential Tax -Property Tax: $15,600 Revenue -City Portion of Property Tax: $5,000 - (Assumes approximately 15 townhouse units) Estimated Current -Approximately $200 per annum Annual Maintenance Cost 4-5 Strategic Disposition of City Lands -Property Identification Fact Sheet STIRLINGIHOMER WATSON ~_. a~~_ ~ ~ ~ ,~ ,~', ~'. ~F `~~ ~ d e~'~ r iF'. jl4d, a ~ ~: 4 . r~ ~i ~~~ Official Plan Des. Open Space Current Zoning P-3 (Hazard Land) Approximate Frontage 110 m on Stirling .~ Priority A Parcel Area 1.37 ha 3.38 acres Available Servicing -Sanitary sewer and water available at Homer Watson Boulevard - A portion of land may be lower than the outlet Environmental -Perimeter has steep slopes regulated by GRCA Factors - Above floodplain Potential Value -Significant value which is partially offset by decommissioning costs, which may be compensated by Brownfield Remediation TIG. Comments -Significant development potential, possibly in conjunction with adjacent site fronting Stirling Avenue - Suitable for medium andlor high-rise apartments - Parks, schools, and other neighbourhood amenities available - Road capacity is excellent and can accommodate growth - Community will benefit from the brownfield clean-up - Currently posses a safety concern and a liability for the City Recommendation - Declaration as surplus lands - Purchaser applies for zone change and Official Plan Amendment - RFP should establish design and green building expectations Ward -Ward 5 -Forest - Rockway Possible Future - Medium to high rise apartment(s) combined with townhouse units Development Potential Tax -Property Tax: $303,400 Revenue -City Portion of Property Tax: $100,000 - (Assumes approximately 250 apartment units and 45 townhouse units) Estimated Current -Approximately $300 per annum Annual Maintenance Cost 4-6 Strategic Disposition of City Lands -Property Identification Fact Sheet KIWANIS PARK -PORTION OF TABLE LANDS _F. ~~ i,~ ~~, ~~~~ e n ! ~, ~iw .~ ~~ ,, ~ 4~ °1 .~ - I P~ ~~ o ~k ~~ ~~ ~~~~~ ~~ ~~=~ ~~ ~,~,~ ~ `~ o,;. , ~ m. ~ +~ ~. ~;°~ ~ •, ~ ~ a ~, ,r u R ,s ti p °~ e ~ e ~ ~ ai. ~~' ,~. j Red boundary line shown above is approximate. ~.j; ." ,~Y9f.? ,, a ~ ~~. ~~ ~ .~ ~y n~, ~~ ~. ~ ~' Priority A Official Plan Des. Low Rise Residential Current Zoning P-1; P-1,1 R (Public Park) Approximate Frontage 18mon Falconridge Dr 20mon Kiwanis Park Dr Potential access through proposed River Ridge subdivision Parcel Area Up to 9.6 ha (23.7 acres) of total 12 ha (29.7 acres) of Table Land (40± ha floodplain to remain) Available Servicing -Water available at Falconridge Drive - Sanitary sewer at Falconridge & Hawkswood Drive Environmental - No limitations above floodplain Factors Potential Value -Significant value Comments -Significant development potential - Urban development necessary for completion of transit loop and beneficial for the completion of the community - Development design should be considered in coordination with the adjacent subdivision, which is now approaching draftapproval - Could serve as an excellent demonstration project, as RFP could specify LEED neighbourhood standard - The remainder of the table lands (2.4 ha) can accommodate future buildings or structures for park use Recommendation -Declare 9.6 ha of the 12.0 ha of table land as surplus - Purchaser applies for zone change and subdivision - Align new and existing roads to complete the planned transit loop Ward -Ward 1-Bridgeport- Centre Possible Future -Single detached, semi-detached, multi-dwelling units Development Potential Tax -Property Tax: $311,500 Revenue -City Portion of Property Tax: $100,000 - (Assumes multiple dwelling units with a maximum of 3 units with a minimum 40% single detached or duplex dwelling units, with 10%- 30% multiple dwelling units (townhouses) Estimated Current -Approximately $8000 per annum Annual Maintenance 4 . Cost 7 ~ ~, .,- ~~ ~ - ~~ ~~ . L `~ - Strategic Disposition of City Lands -Property Identification Fact Sheet SOUTH DRIVE AND GLEN ROAD ~~..., ~~ ~~ ~ A ~ ~~ ~ ~~-. A ~~~~_~ - ~ ~ ~'~ ~~A, .~ Priorit ~~ _ ~ . ~~ ~a~ ~ y .~ ~ B f ~ ~~ ~' . ;kj"~v 5 `.. P ~~ ~ ~ ~ ,rf Official Plan Des. W ~~ . ~£ Low Rise p ~' ~ ~~°~~ ~ti ~~ ~ e ¢r ~ e ~~ a ~ ~ ~ .v ~ ~ p ~ ~~ ~ Residential ., y~ r ~~ o ~,~ ~` _ Current Zoning .r ~~~ '. ~~ ~ ~ ~ ya ?&~ ~~~ ~~~ ~ i;~ ~ ~a~ R-5 Residential ,. i o E. R$ a e ~r' e ,~ ~~:~ _ ~ ~1~ Five) ~~~ a ~ ,, ,~ .~~ _ ~ a ~~ .. . ~~ ~~ .. „~ _ Approximate ~~~ .. ~~ . I ,. . r~ . ~ . ~ ~ ~ ~ 20 S th D .{F m on ou r .: ~ ~. :~r~` .. ~ ~ .f ap Tr ~~.~ . a ~ ~ m on n ~~ . ~ '~ e t ~'~ ~_ ~ ~... ., ,. a .. ~ t ~~ p~r, ffyy~~.~~ ~~~~ ° _~~ Parcel Area ~A __~~ ~~ ~~~ 0.04 ha ;~~ . ~ F 0.09 acre Yk~ 11 • F ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ tidy ~ ~ ~ Available Servicing -Sanitary and storm sewers available off South Drive - Water servicing available off South Drive Environmental - No known limitations Factors Potential Value -Moderate value Comments -Limited space, odd shaped lot - New development should reflect character of the existing neighbourhood - Maybe useful addition to adjacent lot Recommendation - No action at this time Ward -Ward 5 -Forest - Rockway Possible Future -Single detached dwelling that is compatible with neighbourhood Development and also built to LEED standards - Building addition for adjacent residential dwelling unit Potential Tax -Property Tax: $3,500 Revenue -City Portion of Property Tax: $1,100 - (Assumes single detached dwelling unit) Estimated Current -Approximately $80 per annum Annual Maintenance Cost 4- Strategic Disposition of City Lands -Property Identification Fact Sheet KEHLSTREET Priority B 3 ~ e ~' i Official Plan Des. Low Rise Residential Current Zoning R-6 (Residential Six) Approximate Frontage 20monKehlSt. Parcel Area 0.07 ha 0.17 acre Available Servicing -Sanitary and storm sewers available from Kehl Street - Water servicing available from Kehl Street Environmental - No known limitations Factors Potential Value -Significant value Comments -Rear portion of parcel can be further subdivided and consolidated with adjacent lots - Good potential for in-fill development Recommendation - No action at this time Ward -Ward 5 -Forest - Rockway Possible Future -Single detached or duplex dwelling that is compatible with Development neighbourhood built to LEED standards Potential Tax -Property Tax: $2,200 Revenue -City Portion of Property Tax: $720 - (Assumes single detached dwelling unit) Estimated Current -Approximately $75 per annum Annual Maintenance Cost 4-9 Strategic Disposition of City Lands -Property Identification Fact Sheet Official Plan Des. Low Rise Residential Current Zoning P-4 (Golf Course) Approximate Frontage m on Garwood Available Servicing -Sanitary, storm & water available Environmental - No known limitations Factors -Appropriate wetland buffer to be determined through zone change process Potential Value -Significant value Comments -Potential for one building lot with frontage and services on existing street - RFP should establish design and green building expectations and compatibility with neighbouring homes - Single detached or duplex dwelling that is compatible with neighbourhood built to LEED standards Recommendation - No action at this time Ward -Ward 5 -Forest - Rockway Possible Future - 1 single detached or duplex dwelling unit builtto LEED standard Development Potential Tax -Property Tax: $3,600 Revenue -City Portion of Property Tax: $1,200 - (Assumes single detached dwelling unit) Estimated Current -Approximately $150 per annum Annual Maintenance Cost 4-10 CARWOOD AVENUE (PORTION OF ROCKWAY GOLF COURSE PROPERTY) Priority Strategic Disposition of City Lands -Property Identification Fact Sheet FILSINGER PARKIWESTMOUNT -SOUTH OF PAULANDER Priority B ~_ ais~ . ~ y+ ~ ~ .may r ~~' $~ Y "~~° b,~ y' ~,~ m ~ :" ,~ ~' vY' air ~~ } - ~ w ~ ~ s, ., _E~~~ ~~, - ~£ 9 .b R ._ r c '~. - ~ ., ~ ~ ° yr _ .~ ~; ~ i~F ," Yr~, .e RYA 0 • .. a~ a ;~~° sir ~°, °e kn° ~ ~ ~~ ~ i I.=I s~ ~~ ~ . .~ ~ ~ ~ ,. ~. ~~~ ~ ~~; s 4 ~i 5~~ .,°. -. ~.~, e " F ~I.° ,.~ ~~' Rd o°^ . W : h n s ~. ~. .~ e ~- u, ~ ~ ° ~ 1 ~.~ '. ~ n ~ ,~ ~ ~ ' . Y „fir intr. r ¢` r ~~~ n ~ ~°° ~. e ~.._ 5 .~ ~~ ~, 4, ;.~ ; q° ,~~ . ~ P ,~~~e~y i m8. t 1 Official Plan Des. Open Space Current Zoning P-3 (Hazard Land) Approximate Frontage 200 m on Westmount Rd. Parcel Area 4.1 ha 10.1 acres Available Servicing - Water at Westmount Road - Sanitary sewer is on south side of creek - Storm water routing to the creek may be difficult Environmental -Steep and oversteep slopes on portion of property Factors - GRCA engineered floodplain adjacent to watercourse - Further environmental analysis required Potential Value -Moderate value Comments -Currently unimproved parkland - Area has quite alot ofinedium-density affordable housing already - Options include retaining all andlor improving as parkland, or developing part as multiple residential senior accommodations - Potential access onto Westmount Recommendation - No action at this time Ward -Ward 6 -West -Victoria Park Possible Future -Medium-rise senior apartment building with 250 rental units, Development owned by a private company Potential Tax -Property Tax: $248,571.00 Revenue -City Portion of Property Tax: $80,151.12 - (Assumes senior apartment building with 250 units) Estimated Current -Approximately $1700 per annum Annual Maintenance Cost 4-11 Strategic Disposition of City Lands -Property Identification Fact Sheet OLD CHICOPEEIBOUNDBROOK - IDLEWOOD Priority B ~; @:: ~. ~y~ ~,. ,. r f, Pe~:_ ,~ ''~ '~ F r a ~ ~ r~ ~ Yrp ~~~~L '~ ~~u~ s ~~ .~ '~ k "~ 7~~ fi ~ ~-0 gmdy rs~ nx ~~ ~ ~.P ~4ie ~'P ~~ v ~ :~ .~ s ;~~ e~ ;,~~~ &-~ .~ ~~ _ ~ ~' ~ d- ~.~ ~~ li 1~~. 7 '"'1` A ~W ~, a fl I~~ ~ ~ 1'~ ~':~. ~ ~ '~~ 1 n.Y H ~- :. Official Plan Des. Open Space Current Zoning P-2, 27H (Open Space) Approximate Frontage 40-50 m on Old Chicopee Dr. Parcel Area 0.2-0.4ha (0.49-1.0 acres) Available Servicing -Sanitary and storm sewers available at Boundbrook Court - Water servicing available at Boundbrook Court Environmental - No limitations on this portion of property Factors Potential Value -Significant value Comments -Limited frontage - Options include retaining open space and improving as an active park or development of 2-3 lots fronting Old Chicopee Drive, similar to 16m & 18m frontages of adjoining lots - Consider CPTED principles with new lots, specifically visibility to lands west of new lots - A 6 metre wide maintenance access may be required adjacent to 177 Old Chicopee Drive, which would run the length of any future lots, allowing access to the park from Old Chicopee Drive Recommendation - No action at this time Ward -Ward 2 -Chicopee -Grand River Possible Future -Single detached dwelling units, townhouse units Development - 2-3 lots Potential Tax -Property Tax: $12,800 Revenue -City Portion of Property Tax: $4,100 - (Assumes 3 single detached dwelling units) Estimated Current -Approximately $150 per annum Annual Maintenance Cost 4-12 Strategic Disposition of City Lands -Property Identification Fact Sheet SOUTH DRIVEIPERTH LANEIBURNSIDE AVENUE .~ . .. e ~~ :'+~'~ ~ P ~yL'~ e .. ~., ~ ~5~ ~~ ... a ,. ~f - ~ ~~ ! °~~ #*j 9~ ~ w ,, ~' ~.: ~ .d ~ ~ ,. ~ f ~ ~ ` Pnonty k .~! a ~ ~ ,;~ •~ r ;~ ~F a~F ro ~ ~ ~ ~- ~` a ,~ .~. ~~~~ ~~ ~r. 111 ~ ~ ;~ ~ ~' ~`~ . ,.. .. ~ . ~ S. ~, . ~ ~ z .~ ~ . . r ~. 11 ~ " ~ ,o ,' ~.U ,'~ '; .~~ 0 en S ace ., ~ ~ ~ ,, ,~ m ~~~ ~~ p p vv ~~ _ E} r ~, ` , ' ~~ ~M n r . .3 ., ,E p ~. ~ ~ ~ ~. r ~ ~~ ~~ .,~ ~$.~ ~~ Current Zoning y .. . ~ I l d ~ ~ ~ do ~ - p f e ~ -" • _ ,~~ ~ ~~: ~ ~~ ~; ; ~~ .~~ ~ ~ . ~~~ (Hazard Land) ~, ~ ~a~ w ,. ~ ~ ~ ~~~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ Approximate ~~ 1 ~. _ -- : . - . t. ~tl .. Frontage ., 4 ~ ~~~ ~~~ ~ o,~~r ~_= ~~ ~ ~~ ~~~ ~ ~ 40 m on South Dr. ~~ ~ ,,,~, a:, ~ .a4 ~ r ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ E i oa ~~ ~~ _ ~ ~~ ~~ _ . ~~1 ~~~ Parcel Area ~~;r ~ ~a ,~ o ~ . ~~ .~. ,~ a h ~~ . ~ ~ _ ~,~~ ~ ~ a ~~ - ~ ~ 0 65 ha _w r- ~ ~ ~~~m ~ ~~, ;~ ~~ ~ 1.6 acres ~~! m..L i - fie. ~.~ i e 4 x 4., Available Servicing -Water servicing on South Drive - Storm water outlet to lake - Sanitary sewers on South Drive, but will require a pump due to topography, or alternatively through adjacent lands to outlet at Homer Watson Boulevard Environmental - Oversteep slope on property Factors Potential Value -Very limited value Comments -Grading and servicing challenges - Decide ultimate disposition prior to, or concurrent with, development of Stirling Avenue site immediately south - Opportunity to improve as an expansion of Lakeside Park Recommendation - No action at this time Ward -Ward 5 -Forest - Rockway Possible Future -Cluster townhouse development Development Potential Tax -Property Tax: $21,000 Revenue -City Portion of Property Tax: $6,700 - (Assumes 20 townhouse dwelling units) Estimated Current -Approximately $150 per annum Annual Maintenance Cost 4-1 Strategic Disposition of City Lands -Property Identification Fact Sheet LANCASTERIUNION -UNION LANE GREEN Priority C Official Plan Des. Low Rise Residential Current Zoning P-1 (Public Park) Approximate Frontage 9 m on Union Lane ~, w ~ ~~~ ~~~ ~ ~~ .~-~ u~i~~~T ry~ _ ~ ¢ ~~` ~~ - .: s ~..a , _ ~. r. Parcel Area 0.28 ha 0.69 acres Available Servicing -Sanitary and storm sewer at Oxford Street - Water at Oxford Street Environmental - No known limitations Factors Potential Value -Limited value due to the cost of servicing Comments -Possible low-rise apartment units - The site is more beneficial as open space (unimproved as now, or with improvements) Recommendation - No action at this time Ward -Ward 1-Bridgeport- Centre Possible Future -Low-rise apartment building Development Potential Tax -Property Tax: $17,000 Revenue -City Portion of Property Tax: $5,500 - (Assumes 16 unit low-rise apartment building) Estimated Current -Approximately $30 per annum Annual Maintenance Cost 4-14 Strategic Disposition of City Lands -Property Identification Fact Sheet BLACKHORNE DRIVE ,~ ~' ~ ~, a ~~ ~' ~" ~~.~ .tl 1 y~~ -'~~ ~; ,~ -~ ~ _;. _ - ~~~ ., r .. Priority C Official Plan Des. Open Space Current Zoning P-2 (Open Space) Approximate Frontage 20mon Blackhorne Dr. Parcel Area 0.12 ha 0.29 acres Available Servicing -Sanitary and storm sewers available from Blackhorne Drive - Water available from Blackhorne Drive Environmental - No known limitations Factors Potential Value -Moderate value Comments - No specific improvements called for in McLennan Park Master Plan, however, could be beneficial as grand entrance to park Recommendation -Retain and improve as park entrance and as neighbourhood park facility for immediate area Ward -Ward 4 -South Possible Future -Entrance feature to park, park improvements Development Potential Tax -Property Tax: $6,000.00 Revenue -City Portion of Property Tax: $2,000.00 - (Assumes 8 unit low-rise apartment building) Estimated Current -Approximately $70 per annum Annual Maintenance Cost 4-15 Strategic Disposition of City Lands -Property Identification Fact Sheet VICTORIA STREET SOUTH & FISCHER HALLMAN `4 F„ Y~ . ~.~ ~~ ~~s. ~~ ll4 ~~ :- ~ E ~~ ~ ~ ~` .ex . . ,~ ~~ ~`~ Priority C Official Plan Des. Open Space Current Zoning P-2 (Open Space) Approximate Frontage 45 m on Victoria Parcel Area 0.08 ha 0.19 acres Available Servicing -Water servicing available - Storm sewer available - No sanitary sewers available except through the development site to the east Environmental - No limitations Factors Potential Value -Extremely limited value - Adjoining lot (Kitchener Alliance Community Homes) may be a potential purchaser Comments -Limited development potential: extension of adjoining townhouse site - Future development is dependant on parking and access issues from adjoining properties Recommendation - No action at this time Ward -Ward 6 -West -Victoria Park Possible Future -Additional townhouse units, triplex, or duplex Development Potential Tax -Property Tax: $11,000 Revenue -City Portion of Property Tax: $3,500 - (Assumes 3 townhouse units) Estimated Current -Approximately $150 per annum Annual Maintenance Cost 4-16 Strategic Disposition of City Lands -Property Identification Fact Sheet GENERAL DRIVE Priority C ~~ ~ ~ I~ i~ ~~~` E ~ ~~ '~~ n~ u -, ~_ ~ .~~ --~~ - ~~~ iENER..~L ~F~ ' ~~ --- .~ j. -... a9 em :~ i ,r ~~ _ _ ~~ -- ~a, . Official Plan Des. Mixed Use Corridor Current Zoning C-2, 2000 (Neighbourhood Shopping Centre) Approximate Frontage 9.7 m on Lancaster 51 m on General Parcel Area 0.05 ha 0.12 acres Available Servicing -Sanitary and storm sewers available off Lancaster - Water servicing available off Lancaster Environmental - No limitations Factors Potential Value -Limited value - Consolidation with adjoining lot (555 Lancaster W) may be best development option Comments -Limited development opportunities given 9.7 m lot width Recommendation - No action at this time Ward -Ward 1-Bridgeport- Centre Possible Future -Ultimate use (long term) is consolidation for street-oriented mixed Development use development as part of Lancaster Village - Interim use: being considered for improvement as aparkette - signageshould be erected on the site to reflect that the parkette use is temporary to avoid any false impressions if and when the site is ever redeveloped Potential Tax -Property Tax: $7,300 Revenue -City Portion of Property Tax: $1,530 - (Assumes a single commercial use) Estimated Current -Approximately $100 per annum Annual Maintenance Cost 4-17 1 Kl~rc~~R Qevelo pment & Technical Services Appendix "B" . .~. Report To: Mayor and Members of Council Date of Meeting: October 6, 2008 (Strategy Session) Submitted By: Jeff Willmer, Director of Planning Prepared By: Cynthia Fletcher, Director of Facilities Management (519-741- 2424) Jeff Willmer, Director of Planning (519-741-2325) Jim Witmer, Director of Operations (519-741-2657) Ward(s) Involved: All Date of Report: September 22, 2008 Report No.: DTS-08-076 Subject: Strategic Disposition of City-Owned Lands RECOMMENDATION: 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 andlor 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. 4-18 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 (LEAF) it could be catalyst funding for a wide range of projects having community environmental benefit. • 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): o Expectations for high quality urban design to ensure that new development makes a positive contribution to the existing community context; and, o 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: o Contributes to urban revitalization, adding to resident population to support local shops and services within walking distance; o 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; o 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.) o Generates tax revenue where none is being generated now; and, o 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; 4-19 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 I-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 Willmer, Director of Planning Cynthia Fletcher, Director of Facilities Management Jim Witmer, Director of Operations 4-20 ~~LI T"~E ~ I~I~.~ ILL ~E~lET: ~EEf~'E F~I~ -ET f~E1F~I,T ~~L~~~I~TE~T ~1. Tit ~ ~~ r~~~ r~~ r~ ~ nti~l~~ ~~~ ~ ~~t ~1 ~r~~~~ m~r~t ~~~~~ ~ ~ r~~~ti ~~ ~t~~li~f~~~ ~ f~r~~: ~ ~~ ~tr~~~i ~ ~r~~r# ~~ r~h~ ~~ ~, ~ ~ ~~~r~~~~~ f~~ m t i ~~ t~ tQr~~ ~~ ~~~t~ r~l~t~~ t~ t~l~ ~~~~In~rrl~r~t ~r~~ m~int~r~~n ~r~ ~~ ~1~~~~~`I$I~t RI+~~V9 ~~ ~ ~~r~~ ~r~~~~t~ i#~ i ru t its°` ~ ~~ p~~t~ I ~~~; ~r1 ~ p~ri~i ~ ~~~i ~; ~r~. T~~t ~~ pit ~ ~~~~ f ~~~ ~~ ~ I~ ~f I t~ ~~ ~ ~ X31 I ~ ~~ t t~l I ~~~~ ~. Tit tf~~ ~~II'i r~ ~I~~~~~ ~f I ~ n~ ,~~ I ~~ ~~I ~~~~ ~r~rr~ t ~ i ~ ~~I~~: ~f ~~~I~ ~~~, ~i~l~ ~~I~ ~ ~~!~ ~~~~ t~ ~~~ ~' ~r~ F~~~; ~W ~a I ~ ~~ ~ r7~r ~tl~~r I~r~~ p~r~~s~~f~ ~I I ~~#~~ t~ f~l r7~ ~~~~i~i ~ ~r~~~~ ~.. Fig t~ti~~~~ ~~ ~~ I ~ of an ~~~tri ~ I r~t1~; ~n ~, ~~ ~~I~ ~~I~r~ ire th~~'~r~tr~ ~II~"`. I,IT I~ F ~I ~ I~ I~~ ~ ~f ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ 4-21 APPENDIX"C" DTS -Planning ~ ~ ~ 1 ~ i~ Strategic Disposition of Cihr-Owned Lands: Portion of Kiwanis Park Table Lands 4-22 Table of Contents Executive Summary .................................................................................................................................................. 2 Background .............................................................................................................................................................. .. 3 Opportunity ................................................................................................................................................................ .. 3 Current Situation ........................................................................................................................................................ .. 3 Project Description .................................................................................................................................................. ..4 Objectives .................................................................................................................................................................. .. 4 Scope ......................................................................................................................................................................... .. 4 Out of Scope .............................................................................................................................................................. .. 5 Anticipated Outcomes ............................................................................................................................................... .. 5 Stakeholders .............................................................................................................................................................. .. 5 Strategic Alignment ................................................................................................................................................ .. 6 Environment Analysis ............................................................................................................................................ ..7 Project Risk Assessment ....................................................................................................................................... .. 8 Risk of Project ............................................................................................................................................................ .. 8 Risk of Not Proceeding with Project .......................................................................................................................... .. 9 CostlBenefit Analysis ............................................................................................................................................. 10 Quantitative Analysis -Financial Cost &Benefit :.................................................................................................... 10 Qualitative Analysis -Non-Financial Benefits &Costs :........................................................................................... 11 Assumptions .............................................................................................................................................................. 14 Conclusions ............................................................................................................................................................. 15 PAGE 1 4 - 23 Strafe is Dis sition of Ci ed Lands: g po Portion of Kiwanis Park Table Lands This business case will review the opportunity of declaring 9.6 ha of the 12 ha of table lands in Kiwanis Park as surplus to the City's needs. The alternative objective for the project is a "do nothing" approach where no action is taken. In keeping with Council policy, a business case must be developed before considering declaring any parkland as surplus to City's needs. Kiwanis Park is 50.93 hectares (ha} in size, including 12 ha of table lands, which are lands above the flood plain. The remaining 2.4 ha of table lands, along with the 38.9 ha of parkland within the flood plain, are not being considered for declaration as surplus to City needs. If the subject lands are declared as surplus, the City can sell the land to private interest for development through a request for proposal (RFP). The sale and development of the lands would: - Eliminate the ongoing obligation of the City to maintain the land - Remove City's liability for these lands, - Promote high quality development in this developing community by establishing requirements for high quality urban design and green building certification requirements (e.g., "LEED") through conditions of sale put in place by the City to ensure that these community benefits are achieved, - Make use of existing infrastructure, - Generate revenue for reinvestment in public services, where proceeds from the sale can be invested into funds such as the Asset Management Reserve Fund, Park Trust Fund, Local Environmental Action Fund (LEAF), etc., and possibly earmarked specifically for improvements to Kiwanis Park, - Improve community safety by increasing the critical mass of people out using the streets and public spaces, - Create more housing choices in an existing developing community, - Concentrate a larger population in the community to support transit service and a proposed elementary school, and - Generate property tax revenue. As the vendor, the City would be able to place conditions on the sale, such as restrictive covenants, which would allow the City to have a greater measure of influence and control of any future development on the table lands by a private landowner. Conditions can be placed on the sale to establish green building standards and urban design principles for the resulting development. These conditions would create an opportunity to showcase sustainable building technologies and neighbourhood development practices, and ensure that any resulting development is complementary to and compatible with the existing neighbourhood. The purchaser/developer would be responsible for initiating any necessary development applications such as rezoning, subdivision, and site plan approval. The surplus declaration, the sale of the land through a RFP, and the resulting development would be consistent with the objectives and goals of Corporate Plan, the Regional Growth Management Strategy, and Compass Kitchener, and will help achieve target densities set by the Province of Ontario. The probability of risk associated with this project varies from low to high, with a low to medium impact of risk. The risks associated with not proceeding with the project generally have a greater probability of risk and a greater impact of risk when compared to the risks of proceeding with the project. Based on the information presented in this business case, including the impacts, risks, as well as the costs and benefits of completing the project compared to not taking any action, staff recommends that 9.6 ha of the 12 ha of table lands in Kiwanis Park be declared as surplus to the City's needs. PAGE 2 4-24 stw~tegic disposition of city-owned Larxls: Portion of Kiwanis Park Table Lands Opportunity Kiwanis Park is 50.93 hectares (ha) in size and is mainly located within the flood plain of the Grand River. It is located in the north part of the city and is within Ward 1: Bridgeport -Centre. The table lands, which are lands above the flood plain, account for approximately 12 ha or 23.6% of the park's total area. Much of the table land in the park is not well utilized and there are currently no plans for park improvement within this area. The opportunity exists for the City to declare a portion of the table lands as surplus to City needs. If the lands were declared as surplus, the City could sell the land by initiating a request for proposal (RFP} process. As the vendor, the City could place conditions on the sale, which will allow the City to strongly influence any future development on the table lands by a private landowner. This business case will review the possibility of declaring 9.6 ha of the 12 ha of table lands in Kiwanis Park (i.e.,18.8% of the park's total area} as surplus to the City's needs. The remaining 2.4 ha of table lands, along with the 38.9 ha of parkland within the flood plain, are not to be considered for declaration as surplus to City needs. Current Situation The table land portion of Kiwanis Park is designated as Low Rise Residential in the City`s official plan; the flood plain portion of the park is designated as Open Space. The subject table lands are currently underutilized and there are no immediate plans to improve the land for park purposes. Approximately 3.01 ha are a treed area consisting of coniferous and deciduous plantation having very limited natural environmental significance, and approximately 6.61 ha are open field. The open field portion was previously used by the Kitchener-Waterloo Flying Dutchmen RIC Aircraft Club for flying model aircrafts; however that club no longer uses the space and has relocated. The open field portion of the table lands are now occasionally used by a recreational club for practicing and playing Ultimate Frisbee. If the lands were developed, the City would assist the frisbee club in finding a suitable alternative location either in the flood plain portion of the park or another City park altogether. A majority of the recreational facilities in Kiwanis Park, including the man-made swimming pond, play structure, canoe launch, Walter Bean Grand River Trail, scrub ball diamonds and the beach volleyball courts, are located in the flood plain away from the area under consideration. The development of the table ands in Kiwanis Park would be consistent with the objectives of current City, Regional, and Provincial policy. The Regional Growth Management Strategy and the Provincial Places to Grow Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe mandate densities and growth targets for the City of Kitchener. It is plausible to assume that the Kitchener Growth Management Strategy will reflect the same intentions of the aforementioned policies, and will also require future community developments to offer a variety of housing choices, meet increased density targets, utilize existing infrastructure, and create pedestrian-oriented transit-supportive communities. The declaration of a portion of the table lands would be in keeping with all levels of policy. PAGE 3 4-25 Project Description The recommended first step is to initiate a process for declaring the lands as surplus to the City's needs. After declaration the lands may be sold to private interests through a RFP process. As the vendor, the City would be able to place conditions on the sale, such as restrictive covenants, which would allow the City to have a greater measure of influence and control of any future development on the table lands by a private landowner. Conditions can be placed on the sale to establish green building standards and urban design principles for the resulting development. These conditions would create an opportunity to showcase sustainable building technologies and neighbourhood development practices, and ensure that any resulting development is complementary to and compatible with the existing neighbourhood. The sale of the lands would release the City of ongoing maintenance obligations, would generate one- time revenue from the proceeds of sale which would be reinvested in community benefits. Objectives The main objective of this business case is to determine if 9.6 ha of the 12.0 ha of the table lands in Kiwanis Park should be declared as surplus to the City's needs, in order to allow the sale of the land through a RFP process, where the conditions of the sale would regulate the type of development that would occur through private interests. The alternative objective for the project is a "do nothing" approach where no action is taken. Scope Timeframe: The initial declaration progress can take between 2 and 4 months. 1Nth Council's approval, staff would hold a public information session and then prepare a report which summarizes the public comments. The report would be submitted to DTS Committee before a final decision on the declaration may be made. The declaration process, the development and review of proposals, and the negotiations to enter into an agreement of purchase and sale with the successful proponent could take up to one year. The onus would be on the purchaser/developer to initiate any necessary development applications such as rezoning, subdivision, and site plan approval. DepartmentlOrganization: The City divisions that would be involved in the process include Planning, Operations, Communications, Legal, Engineering, Facilities Management and Building. RoleslFunction: The Planning Division, supported by Communications staff, would organize and hold the public information session to inform citizens of the forthcoming public meeting at which the table lands would be considered for declaration as surplus to City needs. The Planning Division would prepare a report to summarize and respond to the input from the information session. Planning and Legal staff would be involved during the declaration process. Planning, Operations, Communications, Legal, Engineering, Facilities Management and Building, as well as GRCA and the Region, would be involved in the RFP process where each divisionlagency would be able to provide comment on each proposal for consideration. The Planning and Legal divisions would work together to negotiate conditions on the sale of land to guide future development. Technology: Conditions of sale in the form of restrictive covenants would guide any future development. Green building technologies and urban design standards should be a required condition for development. PAGE 4 4-26 Out of Scope This business case will review the possibility of declaring 9.6 ha of the 12 ha of table lands in Kiwanis Park as surplus to the City's needs only. It will not include the 2.4 ha of remaining table lands, along with the 38.9 ha of parkland within the flood plain, as these are not being considered for declaration as surplus to City needs. The 2.4 ha of remaining table lands would continue to provide road access to the park and opportunities for future development of buildings, such as a field house or golf course clubhouse, which cannot be developed in the flood plain. Immediate Anticipated Outcomes - That staff will be directed to initiate a process for a portion of the Kiwanis Park Table Lands to be considered for declared as surplus to City needs, identified as Priority A in DTS Report 08-196 and further, that staff be authorized to schedule a public information session to notify the public of the public meeting at which Council would consider declaring the lands as surplus to City needs, and further, that staff be authorized to notify all owners of property within 120 metres of the subject lands of the public information session and the public meeting. Anticipated Outcomes - That 9.6 ha of the 12.0 ha of the undeveloped table lands in Kiwanis Park be declared as surplus to City's needs by Council - That through the competitive RFP process creative proposals will be made for a high quality neighbourhood development - That conditions of sale are placed on the property to ensure high standards for green building technologies and urban design - That the land is sold to private interests for the purpose of development in compliance with the City's official plan - That the resulting development will serve as a showcase for new building standards in the City and serve as a model for future infill developments Stakeholders The following table provides a list of the stakeholders and outlines how they would be involved with the declaration process. Stakeholder Overview of Business Requirements The City of Kitchener Staff from multiple divisions would work collectively to ensure that their roles as outlined in "Section 3: Scope" are satisfied, and that all work on this project is in keeping with City policy. Council/DTS Committee Review the reports submitted, listen to the general public, and make a decision whether or not to declare the subject lands as surplus to City needs. General Public Members of the public would be invited to provide comment, suggestions, and pose questions throughout the process, especially during the public information session. Grand River Conservation Provide comment on proposals in regard to matters within GRCA's Authority mandate. Region of Waterloo Provide comment on proposals in regard to matters of Regional interests, including transit. Prospective Prepare a neighbourhood development concept to be reviewed BuyerslProponents and considered through the RFP process. Purchaser/Successful Initiate development applications and ultimately develop the lands Proponent in accordance with approved specifications. PAGE 5 4-27 The City of Kitchener Corporate Plan This plan outlines objectives and policies that will be used by the City to create a healthy, safe and aesthetically pleasing built community in which its residents can live, work, play, learn and move around easily and in harmony with the environment. It also includes objectives and policies that will promote conservation and management of manmade and natural resources, which are intended to improve the quality of life for the residents of Kitchener. The declaration of 9.6 ha of the 12.0 ha of the Kiwanis Park table lands as surplus to the City's needs would allow staff to proceed with a RFP and the sale of the land for development with conditions, is in keeping with the Corporate Plan. The land is currently underutilized parkland and does not contribute significantly to urban vitality. Continued use of the area as park creates an ongoing maintenance cost for the City as well as land owner liability. The sale of the lands would generate revenue that would be reinvested into the community. Development of the lands would allow for completion of the community, including completing the transit loop, and adding to the elementary school aged population to help justify development of a new school. Conditions on the sale of the land would ensure that quality urban development occurs on the lands. The table lands would serve as an appropriate location for development which would not impact on the Grand River or its flood plain. The Region of Waterloo Growth Management Strategy The RGMS is founded on the following six goals: to enhance our natural environment, to build vibrant urban places, to provide greater transportation choice, to protect our countryside, to foster a strong economy, and to ensure overall coordination and communication. This proposal is also consistent with the goals of the Regional Growth Management Strategy. Any future development on the table lands should take the form of a LEED (Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design) certified community with enhanced urban design. The resulting development will increase the density of the community which will help support transit services, offering residents greater choice in transportation. This proposed development would also utilize existing infrastructure including the Bridgeport North sanitary sewage pumping station which was sized to accommodate urban development of these lands. Compass Kitchener Council established a committee of citizens called Compass Kitchener to engage the community in developing and achieving a shared vision for the future. The committee assists in building a positive community identity, engaging residents in dialogue, and creating mechanisms to report back to the public and Council. The Environics survey of 2005 and the Who Are You Kitchener survey of 2006 were undertaken as part of the Compass Kitchener mandate. Through these surveys, citizens have expressed that they would like to see the City of Kitchener become a cosmopolitan mid-sized city that combines the best of a small town quality of life with the amenities of an urban centre. Citizens very strongly supported carefully planned neighbourhoods versus giving developers control. Environmental improvement, particularly air quality, was a very high priority. The development of the table lands with a mix of residential dwelling units that are constructed with high standards of urban design should complete the existing community, create the feel of a small town, and introduce an increased density that will support urban amenities such as transit service. Most importantly, this rare - if not unique -opportunity for a showcase development, featuring LEED building technologies at a neighbourhood scale, would become a model for other large- scalesustainable developments contributing to environmental improvement. PAGE 6 4-28 The subject lands are located on the southwest table lands of Kiwanis Park. The lands directly south and east of Kiwanis Park are commonly known as River Ridge Subdivision. Provisional projections estimate that Kitchener will grow to 311,500 residents by the year 2031. Kitchener's labour force is expected to increase by 37-40,000 jobs by 2031. In addition to accommodating the inevitable growth that is going to occur over the next 23 years, the City will also have to meet new targets and objectives set forth by the Province. The City will be mandated to intensify existing neighbourhoods, where 40% of all new residential development will have to occur within an existing built up area. The City would be able to regulate the type of development that would occur on the site as a result of the approval process. For example, the adjacent draft approved subdivision, River Ridge, includes a special zoning provision to ensure that a variety of housing choices were included in the development. Special zoning provision 306R regulates the maximum number of units in a multiple dwelling, the lot width for single detached, semi-detached, and townhouse dwellings units, the minimum and maximum percentage of any type of dwelling unit. By adding special provision to the zoning during the rezoning process, the City can ensure that future developments will reflect new growth targets. The sale of the lands would help complete the community. By utilizing such tools as zoning provisions and conditions of sale, any resulting development would be diverse and would be able to be flexible enough to accommodate future trends in the housing market. If the lands are not declared as surplus, they would remain as underutilized parkland indefinitely, or until such time as alternative plans are made. There would be no substantial impact on the community in leaving the lands unimproved, but if sold, the revenue generated would be able to be reinvested into the community, and therefore improve the quality of life for the residents of the greater community. The subject table lands are currently underutilized and there are no immediate plans to improve the land for park purposes. Approximately 3.01 ha are a treed area consisting of coniferous and deciduous plantation having very limited natural environmental significance, and approximately 6.61 ha are open field. The mature hedgerow along the south and west limit of the property will be assessed in the review of development application. The 38.9 ha parkland that is within the floodplain is not being considered for declaration. The remainder of the 2.4 ha of table lands are also not being considered for declaration to allow for any future developments within the park that are not appropriate within the floodplain area. If the lands were declared as surplus, sold and developed, there would be a resulting effect on adjoining residential lands, in particular the 13 existing homes whose lots adjoin Kiwanis Park. These lots would interface with residential development instead of a park. The declaration process and RFP would utilize staff time and would possibly incur some costs. The revenue generated from the sale would far exceed any costs that may be incurred from the declaration and sale of the lands. There would be no substantial foreseeable costs associated with the declaration process and the RFP that would not be recovered as a result of the revenue generated from the sale of the lands. PAGE 7 4-29 Risk of Project This project is subject to a variety of risks which range in probability and impact. In the table below, the risks are identified and a mitigation strategy is provided. The probabilities of the risk occurring as well as the impact of the risk are also identified in the following table. Risk Factor (Issue and Impact Likelihood Overall Mitigation Status Risk) Public opposition to the 5.00 2.00 10.00 The City would hold a public information declaration of City-owned session before declaring any land as surplus to parkland as surplus to the allow interested parties an opportunity to City's needs. provide comment. The comments would be summarized and a mitigation strategy may have to be developed to respond to any issues. The land is declared as 1.00 1.00 1.00 The City would maintain ownership of the land surplus but there are no and it would continue to be used in the same interested bidders during manner until a subsequent RFP is initiated. the RFP process. The land is purchased, but 1.00 1.00 1.00 Through conditions of sale and the RFP is not immediately process, the City may establish timelines for developed (changes in the development, failing which the lands would be economy, housing trends, returned to the City; however, if the market is etc). soft and the lands are partially developed this may not be realistic. None of the candidates 1.00 1.00 1.00 Through the RFP process, the City would propose development that select a purchaser based on the type of meets the City's development that is proposed for the site. The expectations for City would also place conditions on the sale of sustainability, urban the land to ensure the type of any resulting design and compatibility . development. If no proposals are acceptable the City may opt not to accept any. Council declares a portion 1.00 2.00 2.00 In order to allow for the completion of the of table land that is less planned transit loop and for the proposed than 9.6 ha as surplus to increase in density, it is important that a City needs. sufficient portion of table lands be declared. Staff is recommending that 9.6 ha of table lands be declared at this time, but the project could proceed with a smaller portion of surplus table land. The risks associated with this project have a generally low probability of risk and a low to medium impact of risk. The exception to this statement is the risk of public opposition. The residents of the surrounding community, as well as other interested parties, may have an objection to the declaration of parkland as being surplus to City needs. As identified above, a public information session would be held to inform residents and others about the project as well as to act as a forum to collect public input. PAGE 8 4-30 Risk of Not Proceeding with Project There are also a number of risks associated with no proceeding with the project which are identified in the table below. Risk Factor (Issue and Risk) Impact Likelihood Overall Mitigation Status Not declaring the Kiwanis 2.00 2.00 4.00 If the lands are not declared as surplus to Park table lands land as the City's needs, the project would not surplus to the City's needs. commence and no sale or development Continue with maintenance. can occur. The land would remain and Forego revenue from sale. undevelopedlunimproved parkland and Pass up opportunity for the City would not collect any tax showcase green /sustainable revenue forthe subject property neighbourhood. Declare as surplus but 2.00 2.00 4.00 The City would maintain ownership of the maintain ownership of the land and it would continue to be used in subject lands for the time the same manner. The City would being. continue to be responsible for the maintenance and liability of the lands. Decision on timing of RFP would be made later. The risks associated with not proceeding with the project generally have a greater probability of risk and a greater impact of risk when compared to the risks of proceeding with the project. PAGE 9 4-31 Full Cost Analysis The foreseeable costs associated with the declaration process, the RFP, and the sale of the lands would be minimal. Staff from several divisions within the City would be involved in various roles throughout the process. The use of staff time does not have a direct cost associated with this project, but the utilization of staff time may have indirect effects within individual divisions. The work involved with this project would not require hiring any additional resources such as new staff or consultants. The costs associated with the project are primarily staff time. The anticipated direct costs for this project are minimal; most are disbursements related to advertising for and holding the public information session. Timeframe The costs would be initially incurred at the onset and in the early stages of the project. Revenue from the sale of the land would be received by the City on closing. Once the lands are developed the City, Region and Province would be receiving ongoing property tax revenue. Quantitative Analysis -Financial Cost & Benefit: The following table outlines the known anticipated costs and benefits of the project. Year Year 0 Year 1 Year 2 Low Year 2 High Year 3 Project Status Project Start Declaration and RFP processes Sale of land Sale of land Yearly Cost and Benefits after sale Benefits: Revenue $ - $ - $ 5,400,000.00 $ 7,300,000.00 $ 100,000.00 Costs: Disbursements: Supplies $ 500.00 $ 200.00 $ 200.00 $ - Disbursements: Public I nformation Session $ 2,000.00 $ - $ - $ - City Staff Time $ 5, 000.00 $ 7, 500.00 $ 10, 000.00 $ - Ongoing Operational Costs: Operations Staff Time: Maintain Infrastructure $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 5,000.00 Operations Staff Time: Maintain as Parkland $ 8,000.00 $ 8,000.00 $ - $ - $ - Net Benefit or Cost Net Present Value $ (15,500.00) $ (15,700.00) $ 5,389,800.00 $ 7,289,800.00 $ 95,000.00 PAGE 10 4-32 Benefits The current operating and maintenance cost of the table lands is estimated at $8,000 per year. Proceeds of sale are estimated at $5.4M (shown as Year 2 Low) to $7.3M (Shown as Year 2 High) on the table above. The estimated revenue from the sale of the 9.6 ha of raw residential land is values at $700,000 to $950,000 / ha, discounted 20% to account for sustainable design requirements and uncertain timing of actual development. The City's share of property tax revenue after development estimated at $100,000 lyr. Costs The disbursements for supplies are based on an estimate for general office supplies used by staff for this project. The costs for the public information session are estimated based on the costs of supplies for the session specifically, room rental, display boards and presentation, staff time at the session, newspaper advertisement, and refreshments. City Staff Time and External Agencies Staff Tim is estimated at an average of $751hour. The costs for ongoing Operations Staff Time for the maintenance of future infrastructure and the maintenance as parkland was estimated by the Operations Divisions, based on present day values. In addition to the costs outlines on the previous table, agencies that are external to the City will also incur a cost throughout the project as well. Project Alternative The project alternative of the "do nothing" approach will only incur the Operations Staff Time: Maintain as Parkland at an estimated yearly cost of $8000. Qualitative Analysis -Non-Financial Benefits & Costs: Costs The following table outlines the known costs of the project and identifies the type of cost, the occurrence of the cost in the project, the recipient of the cost, and the certainty of the cost to the recipient. Cost Type of Cost Occurrence of Cost Recipient of the Certainty of Cost in the Project Cost to the Recipient Disbursements: Direct Throughout Planning Division High Supplies Disbursements: Direct Initial Planning Division High Public Information Session Staff Time Indirect Throughout Multiple City High Divisions External Agencies Indirect Later Stages GRCA and Region Low Staff Time of Waterloo Operations Staff Direct Completion and Operations Division High cost to maintain ongoing new infrastructure (after development) PAGE 11 4-33 Benefits The following table outlines the benefits of the project and identifies the type of benefit, the occurrence of the benefit in the project, the recipient of the benefit and the certainty of the benefit to the recipient. Benefit Type of Benefit Occurrence of the Recipient of the Certainty of the Benefit in the Benefit Benefit to the Pro'ect Recipient Revenue from the Direct During the sale of City of Kitchener, High sale of the lands lands Citizens Ongoing tax Direct After the sale of City of Kitchener, High revenue lands, ongoing Region of Waterloo, indefinitely Provincial Ministry of Education Improved !Complete Indirect After completion of Citizens of the City High community development of the of Kitchener (completion of lands transit loop, support for investment in infrastructure, housin choice) Showcase urban Indirect After completion of Citizens of the City High development development of the of Kitchener (including lands showcases green building technologies and enhanced urban design guidelines Enhanced quality of Indirect After the sale of Citizens of the City High life from lands, once of Kitchener reinvestment into reinvestment the existing opportunities are community identified Profit from the Indirect/Direct At Completion of Developer(s) and High development of the servicing and contractor(s) lands construction upon sales of developed properties PAGE 12 4-34 Qualitative Cost and Benefit Timeframe Analysis The following table outlines the qualitative costs and benefits projected over the lifetime of the project Qualitative Analysis Start of the Project During the Project Sale of Lands Ongoing After the Project Benefits One time revenue from the sale of the lands Direct Ongoing tax revenue from resulting development Direct Improved community through reinvestment Indirect Showcase community with enhanced building and design criteria Indirect Enhanced quality of life in existing community Indirect Profit for developer(s) and contractor(s) Directllndirect Costs Supplies Direct Direct Public Information Session Direct Direct Direct Staff Time Indirect Indirect Indirect External Agencies Indirect Operations Staff cost to maintain new infrastructure Direct PAGE 13 4-35 Assumptions The following assumptions were made for the qualitative cost and benefit analysis of the project; 1. That there will be a financial return on investment through the sale of the 9.6 ha of table lands. 2. The "project" refers to the declaration of the lands as surplus, the RFP, and the sale of the lands to private interests. 3. The "project" does not include the development approvals or any resulting development of the site by private interests 4. The "project" will be completed within 8-12 months. 5. Existing municipal infrastructure is in place to service the subject area. 6. The resulting development will result in intensification of the existing community. 7. The resulting development will comply with the City and Region's Official Plan. 8. The sale of the subject lands will allow private development, growth, beautification and stability within the existing community. 9. The development of the lands will result in an increase in the sale of Kitchener's utility products (water, sewer, gas, hydro). 10. The City will have full control of the approval processes required in order to realize the resulting development will comply with the conditions of sale, ensuring the development of a product that is innovative in green building technologies and has enhanced urban design guidelines. PAGE 14 4-36 Conclusions This following table summarizes the impact, risk, as well as the costs and benefits associated with completing the project compared to taking no action. Project Alternatives Business & Operational Impact Project Risk Assessment CostlBenefit Analysis Declare 9.6 ha of the Subject lands are not Low to high probability of High certainty of minimal 12.0 ha of the table developed or improved and risks. Low to medium indirect and direct costs lands in Kiwanis Parkas no plans exist to develop or impact of risk. through the project which surplus to the City's improve them. The City would be recovered many needs. Sell the land can declare the subject times over through the through a RFP process. lands as surplus to City sale of the lands. High Place conditions on the needs and sell the subject certainly of long-term sale to regulate the lands through a RFP and direct and indirect resulting development. place conditions on the benefits to the City and sale, ensuring quality Citizens. development occurs. Develop a community that showcases green technologies and enhanced urban design, enhancing the quality of the existing communit . The "do nothing" Continue to maintain the Medium probability of Continued direct costs of approach where no table lands as parkland, risk. Medium impact of maintenance of the action is taken. The undeveloped for other risk. property and indirect cost land remains City-owned urban purposes. of liability associated with as undeveloped use of the property. parkland. Based on the information presented in this business case, including the impacts, risks, as well as the costs and benefits of completing the project and not taking any action, staff recommends 9.6 ha of the 12 ha of table lands in Kiwanis Park be declared as surplus to the City's needs. PAGE 15 4-37