Report Template

Report to/Rapport au :

Corporate Services and Economic Development Committee

Comité des services organisationnels et du développement économique

and Council/et au Conseil

April 10 2007 / le 10 avril 2007

Submitted by/Soumis par : Steve Kanellakos, Deputy City Manager/

Directeur municipal adjoint,

Community and Protective Services/Services communautaires et de protection

Contact Person/Personne ressource : Aaron Burry, Director

Parks and Recreation/Parcs et Loisir

(613) 580-2424 x 23666, Aaron.Burry@ottawa.ca

Orléans (1)

Ref N°: ACS2007-CPS-PAR-0003

SUBJECT:	Public private partnership - petrie island beach pavilion

OBJET :	partenariat public-privÉ - pavillon de plage aux isles petrie

REPORT RECOMMENDATIONS

That the Corporate Services and Economic Development Committee recommend Council approve:

1. That staff issue a request for proposals per the attached framework in Document 1, for the design, build, partial financing and privately operated beach pavilion at Petrie Island that will provide enhanced public spaces including washrooms and space for City life guarding operations;

2. That the Request for Proposal reflects the City’s potential capital contribution towards the construction of beach pavilion, previously approved capital budget, to a maximum of $900,000.00; and

3. That staff report back to Committee and Council with the results of the RFP. ~~/public consultation~~

RECOMMANDATIONS DU RAPPORT

Que le Comité des services organisationnels et du développement économique recommande au Conseil municipal :

1. d’autoriser le personnel à lancer une demande de propositions, selon le cadre qui figure dans le document un ci‑joint, pour la conception, la construction, le financement partiel et l’exploitation privée du pavillon de plage de l’île Petrie, de manière à améliorer l’espace public, y compris la construction de toilettes et d’un espace administratif réservé aux activités de secourisme de la Ville;

2. d’approuver que la demande de propositions reflète la possibilité d’une contribution pour dépenses en capital maximale de 900 000 $ - budget d’immobilisation déjà approuvé -, pour la construction du pavillon de plage; et

3. de demander au personnel de rendre compte des résultats de la demande de propositions au Comité et au Conseil.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

In 1998, the former municipality of Cumberland identified Petrie Island as having great potential and opportunities to develop into a major outdoor destination.

The short term vision provides for a basic development plan including the creation of two beach and swim areas with appropriate support infrastructure including sites services, a building able to support a beach operation such as washrooms, canteen, storage, first aid station and parking. The longer term vision expands the array of activities year-round, incorporating an expanded facility capable of accommodating multipurpose meetings and community space, more elaborate food service and associated programming activities.

Construction was initiated in 2003, and, to-date, the establishment of the two beach areas, grading of the entire site and construction of the parking lots has been completed with significant attendance at the site over the course of the past two years.

By May of this year, work will be completed to bring water and sanitary services to the site to service the beach pavilion and its ancillary spaces.

Presently, the City only has sufficient budget to build a basic structure with washrooms, office and canteen, and proposes to issue a request for proposals (RFP) under the Public Private Partnership process to determine whether there is any interest from the private sector to contribute additional funding to build and operate a more comprehensive beach pavilion in keeping with the long term strategy.

The RFP would reflect the capital dollars (up to $900,000) already included in the City’s budget for the construction of the pavilion.

The Department proposes to report back to Committee and Council with the results of the RFP including a recommended course of action.

RÉSUMÉ

En 1998, l’ancienne municipalité de Cumberland a désigné l’île Petrie comme ayant un potentiel et des possibilités de développement considérables comme destination de plein air.

La vision de développement à court terme repose sur un plan de base comprenant la création de deux plages et de zones de natation ainsi que l’infrastructure de soutien appropriée, notamment des services, une bâtisse appuyant les activités de la plage - toilettes, cantine, entreposage, poste de premiers soins, etc. et stationnement. La vision de développement à plus long terme prévoit que des activités seront offertes à l’année longue, et inclut une installation capable d’accueillir des réunions multifonctionnelles ainsi que des activités communautaires, des services alimentaires plus élaborés et un programme d’activités connexes.

Les travaux de construction ont été lancés en 2003 et, à ce jour, les deux plages ont été établies, le site en entier a été nivelé et deux terrains de stationnement ont été construits; le site a connu un achalandage important au cours des deux dernières années.

En mai de cette année, les travaux devant assurer l’approvisionnement en eau et les services d’hygiène du pavillon de plage ainsi que des espaces connexes seront terminés.

Actuellement, la Ville ne dispose que d’un budget suffisant pour construire la structure de base avec toilettes, bureau et cantine, et prévoit diffuser une demande de propositions, en vertu d’un processus de partenariats publics‑privés, dans le but d’évaluer l’intérêt du secteur privé à contribuer des fonds supplémentaires pour construire et exploiter un pavillon offrant une gamme plus complète de services, dans l’esprit de la stratégie à long terme.

La demande de propositions tiendrait compte du fonds d’immobilisations (jusqu’à 900 000 $) déjà inclus dans le budget de la Ville pour la construction du pavillon.

Le Service propose de présenter au Comité et au Conseil les résultats de la demande de propositions, y compris le plan d’action recommandé.

BACKGROUND

In 1998, the former municipality of Cumberland identified Petrie Island as having great potential and opportunities to develop into a major outdoor destination. The park construction was initiated in 2003, converting the prior industrial sand dredging operation into a formalized park and beach operation. It should be noted the western section of the park was already in public ownership, safeguarding the environmentally sensitive area with an interpretation centre, walking trails and picnic area. The short term vision provides for a basic development plan including the creation of two beach and swim areas with appropriate support infrastructure including site services, a building able to support a beach operation such as washrooms, canteen, storage, first aid station and parking. The longer-term vision expands the array of activities year round, incorporating an expanded infrastructure capable of accommodating multipurpose meetings and community space, a more elaborate food service such as a café, beach programming/activities such as outdoor volleyball and special events etc.

Phase 1 created the two beach areas, the dredging of a portion of one of the swim areas to ensure bather safety, grading of the entire site, and construction of the parking lots. As park development has continued, the popularity of the beach has increased creating traffic, parking and access issues that must be managed in future.

ATTENDANCE*

YEAR	BEACH LIFEGUARD ANNUAL REPORT	FRIENDS OF PETRIE (FOPI) ANNUAL REPORT
2005	140,121	308,400
2006	122,450	239,535

* NOTE: The beach reports reflects attendance at the beaches (sand area only), during lifeguard operating hours of 12 noon-7p.m., end of June-end of August. There is a 13% drop in attendance from 2005 to 2006 due in large part to a colder summer and beach closures. The FOPI figures report on total visitors/users (picnic area, walking trails etc) to the entire park, using vehicular counts with a formula, for the period of May to end of September, 9:00am-8:00pm. There is a 22% decrease in attendance due to colder weather and beach closures.

A tender has been issued in the amount of $992,717 (exclusive of GST) to bring services (water and sanitary) to the site, with the view of servicing a beach pavilion and its ancillary spaces.

The City has contracted the following works that will be completed by May 30/07:

· 3” water service line

· 3: sewer force main

· dry hydrant (September/07)

· Lifeguard (large equipment) storage building

· Water service line to lifeguard storage building

The City is also working with Hydro One to upgrade the existing hydro service to Phase 3.

DISCUSSION

The design for the Beach pavilion has been problematic as the original plan and associated budget was for a basic support building with limited washroom facilities, minimally sized canteen and small administrative space for the lifeguard operation. As a result of discussions with Friends of Petrie, Team Ottawa-Orleans, various community groups and the public in general, an expanded building program was requested which could easily and efficiently accommodate a future expansion, including base elements required for eventual year round use such as heating system, a more comprehensive canteen space/hot foods with adjoining outdoor space, outdoor showers and ensuring the footprint and configuration of the base building could easily accommodate the addition of multi-purpose meeting/programming space. The intent was always to partner with the private sector to secure the above-mentioned long-term, comprehensive program.

Accordingly, the tender issued for the site servicing also included the landscaping, separate storage building with water service and architectural plans for a 3,130 square feet beach pavilion with 1,110 square feet of covered outdoor space. The building tender had regard for the long-term vision of a heated building and expansion potential to accommodate larger server, outdoor patio and the potential to expand.

To accommodate both the short and long term vision for the site, the project has been divided into a two-pronged approach; (1) execute the works associated with bringing in services and complete the storage building and (2) issue a request for proposal under the Public Private Partnership process to determine whether there is interest from the private sector to contribute additional funding in order to build and operate a more comprehensive beach pavilion, that begins to meet the City’s long term vision for the park, specifically year-round use, multi-use programming and meeting space.

If the Request for Proposal is unsuccessful, the city will proceed on its own with the bare minimum building.

In issuing the RFP, the City’s intent is to secure additional funds through the partnership to construct a more comprehensive pavilion able to offer a greater array of services to on-site users in return for exclusive rights for food and beverage services and operation of the pavilion.

The City’s capital contribution of $ 900,000 is based on the Department’s approved budget allocation for the project, minus the servicing costs described under the Background section of this report. The previously prepared design plans for the pavilion will be made available to the preferred proponent should they be interested in pursuing the original design with the architectural firm engaged by the City. As the City does not own the copyright, it will be made available should the two parties be interested in pursuing a contract between themselves. For information only, the tender issued in late 2006 for site servicing and the construction of the pavilion that had regard for the future expansion totalled $2.884M.

As established in the City’s public-private partnership process, staff are to report back to Committee and Council with the results of the Request for Proposal prior to proceeding to negotiations with the preferred partner. Part of the preferred partner’s obligation under the negotiation phase, is to host in partnership with the City, a public meeting to secure comment from residents and users and if need be, mitigate areas of concerns or requested changes.

RURAL IMPLICATIONS

Petrie Island is a destination used by many east end residents, including rural residents.

CONSULTATION

No formal public consultation has taken place at this time, as a public meeting will occur once Committee and Council have approved a preferred partner. A draft copy of this report was circulated to Friends of Petrie, Team Ottawa-Orleans and PRAC.

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS

There are no financial implications associated with this report. There are no financial implications in this report. Furthermore, the City’s contribution towards the construction of the pavilion should a successful partner be approved, is included in Parks and Recreation’s account # 903854. There are future financial implications and these will be reviewed once the Request for Proposals has been completed and reported back to Council.

The Request for Proposal may result in costs to the City, which would impact future budgets. Estimates of any increased cost will be included in the subsequent report on the Request for Proposals. Funds are budgeted and available to support the City’s commitment of $900K in recommendation 2.

SUPPORTING DOCUMENTATION

Document 1 - Request for Proposals Framework

DISPOSITION

Upon approval of this report, a corporate team will be established with representatives from Parks and Recreation, Supply Management, Real Property and Asset Management and Planning, Environment and Transit, including the Economic Development and Strategic Projects.

Document 1

FRAMEWORK

1.0 Compatibility with Petrie Island Vision

Petrie Island Park, when completed, will be an all-season, day-use public amenity designed to provide for safe, water-oriented, pedestrian-friendly recreation opportunities for residents and visitors while maintaining and protecting the significant natural qualities of this portion of the Ottawa River and its wetland landscape.

Ideally, the private-sector partner who is able to meet and/or exceed the City objectives listed below through the RFP evaluation process will be staff’s recommended preferred partner to Council for approval.

2.0 Compatibility with the Park’s Objectives

· The park will be managed as an integral component of the overall Island of which the majority shall continue to be managed for conservation and preservation

· The park is designed and operated to minimize negative impacts on the Petrie Island Wetland including both terrestrial and aquatic habitat

· The park takes advantage of its unique opportunity for users to experience the shoreline and views of the Ottawa River, as well as the opportunity for interpretation of the natural and cultural environments

· The park will eventually provide user activities during all four-seasons but for daytime use only

· The park’s waterfront is managed/constructed as a naturalized sandy shoreline while creating the opportunity for aquatic habitat enhancement

· The park’s interior is to retain an open, sunny and sandy character and an emphasis on natural vegetation

· The park’s access is to focus on pedestrians and cyclists, with cars and car parking not dominating the Island

· The park’s active recreation amenities and infrastructure is to be carefully managed so that the Island is not overwhelmed with human activity. The park has a limited carrying capacity and as a result, the introduction of new programming/activities must be limited and able to be successfully accommodated

3.0 Preferred Partner

· The successful partner(s) will have the capabilities and capacity to undertake this long-term relationship with the City.

· The successful partner(s) must demonstrate a public service attitude and philosophy that includes concern for public accountability and accessibility

· The successful partner (s) must demonstrate added value being gained to the City by entering into this partnership

· The successful partner(s) must have regard for the sensitivity, ecological and aquatic life of the park and strike an appropriate balance with human activity

· It is understood that the staff hired are employees of the Proponent and not of the City of Ottawa. The proponent will not be viewed as an agent of the Corporation for any purpose.

4.0 Planning and Development

· The original Beach Pavilion design had already obtained all site plan approvals. Any substantial changes to the building footprint will require re-submission, if not, a revised site plan

· Proponents will be expected to comply with existing municipal standards and by-laws

· Responsible for planning process

· Architects drawing

5.0 Beach Pavilion Basic Building Program to be expanded

· Paterson completed compaction testing of the existing podium of the original building site plan location. Therefore, the limits beyond the original building footprint will require geotechnical analysis.

Components	Approx. square footage	Comments
Public Washrooms	920 sq.ft	Female: 10 toilets, 5 wash basins Male: 4 toilets, 6 urinals, 5 wash basins
Family Washrooms	120 sq.ft.	1 toilet, 1 wash basin
Janitorial	50 sq.ft.	1 slop sink
First Aid/lifeguard/storage	500 sq.ft	Incorporate a locker room with single shower with small change area, including staff washroom with 1 toilet, 1 washbasin. 1 sink in first aid area and
Mechanical room	250 sq.ft
Canteen (including storage)	450 sq.ft	Service counter open to outside, ideally under sheltered area
Outdoor showers	2
Outdoor covered sheltered area	900 sq.ft
Outdoor garbage enclosure

6.0 Beach Pavilion - Access and circulation

· Access should be barrier free between parking areas and the beach pavilion

· Bike parking racks to be provided beside the Beach pavilion

· Terminus of access road to have elongated cul-de-sac with river view for drive-through sight-seers and to provide a drop-off and pick-up area

· Vehicle turning radius of access road to accommodate maintenance vehicles, emergency vehicles and buses

7.0 Additional Compatible Recreational Activities

In addition to the naturalized sandy shoreline and designated swim areas;

· Open multi-purpose sand area

· Sand dune play area(s)

· Beach volleyball courts

· Picnic tables

8.0 Operation and Management Services

· Operation, management and maintenance of the Beach Pavilion under a long-term agreement

· Include exclusive rights to the operation of a café/food services, rental of minor park equipment i.e. beach volleyball nets

· Year round operation

· Addition of multi-purpose space

· Special events programming

9.0 Timing

· Specifics to be detailed in the RFP

· P3 process from Council approval to initiate RFP to Council approving final agreement - February 2008

· Construction start after the end of summer beach season - September 2008

Public private partnership - petrie island beach pavilion

partenariat public-privÉ - pavillon de plage aux isles petrie

ACS2007-CPS-PAR-0003 ORLÉANS (1)

Mr. P. Grandmaître, a resident, indicated he and his brother were the owners of the marina located just before the causeway at the access to Petrie Island. As such, he submitted they had front-row seats with respect to the number of patrons attending Petrie Island. Notwithstanding last year’s water quality issues, he felt Petrie Island was a success. Mr. Grandmaître fully endorsed and supported the staff recommendation to engage the public sector in the development of Petrie Island. However, he indicated a desire for an expedited process. He indicated that last year, he submitted a proposal, which he referred to as the Ottawa Option. He suggested the City could expedite the process by adopting his proposal instead of following the RFP process. He explained that the Ottawa Option was based on the original program developed by staff at the time to service the site and to build a base building. He felt the framework as in place and that the transparency of the process would be maintained in that his proposal involved a public participation process. Should the Committee and Council not agree with what he was proposing, he re-iterated his support for the staff recommendation.

Responding to a question from Councillor Jellett, Mr. Grandmaître indicated that, should Council opt for the RFP process, he would be submitting a proposal.

In response to questions from Councillor Bloess, Mr. Grandmaître confirmed that the proposal he submitted last year did not meet the requirements outlined in the staff report. He acknowledged that the lay of the land had changed and that he would have to modify his proposal slightly.

Responding to a question from Councillor Bloess with respect to Mr. Grandmaître’s proposal submitted last year, Mr. Burry indicated the City had a number of letters on record from companies looking for opportunities to do business and he submitted that the Ottawa Option was not sufficiently unique for staff to want to advance it at the exclusion of others. With respect to the issue of timing, he did not believe the Ottawa Option would significantly shorten the timeframe because the proposal would have to be refined and then put back out to allow proponents opportunities to bid on it.

With respect to the timelines, Councillor Bloess wondered how it could be expedited so that construction would happen over the coming winter and the development would be in place for the 2008 season, instead of 2009. Mr. Burry indicated staff had developed the timelines based on their experiences from past P3 projects that were community-based; where the projects attracted a lot of attention and the public wanted opportunities for input. He submitted that Council could accelerate the process, but at the expense of allowing the public its opportunities to provide feedback. He explained that the timelines were based on having a fairness commission assigned to the project.

Responding to a further question from Councillor Bloess with respect to expediting the process, Mr. Burry indicated staff would do everything it could to expedite the process. However, he maintained the need to allow reasonable time for RFPs to be proposed, reasonable time to consult on and refine proposals, and reasonable time for Council to consider those proposals and make a decision.

Mayor O’Brien submitted there was another option. The Committee could adopt a motion for Council’s consideration to move ahead with the proposal already before staff; the Ottawa Option, including a month or two of public consultation the coming summer.

Councillor Bloess referenced the City’s acquired experience with P3 projects and the uniqueness of this particular project. He indicated he was looking for a streamlined process, noting the important of public consultation and of making sure the various groups were heard. As one possible proponent, he asked whether Mr. Grandmaître could think of an expedited process and whether he would be in a position to start construction this fall. Mr. Grandmaître stated that was the purpose of this presentation to Committee; to make that level of commitment. He maintained the issue came down to process. He indicated he preferred the Ottawa Option because it would mean measuring submissions against a program whereas with the P3, staff could be measuring 10 different submissions and evaluating them just to get to what is wanted. With respect to expediting the process, he noted that the building plans had already been developed and circulated to the community.

Councillor Bloess indicated he would be moving a motion calling for an accelerated, streamlined process.

Responding to questions from Mayor O’Brien, Mr. Burry indicated staff would do everything they could to expedite the process, barring any directions from Committee, when a subsequent report would come forward, to go back and review or refine certain aspects.

Mr. Kirkpatrick sensed Mr. Burry was based his responses on past experiences, where staff had received opposite feedback from Committee with respect to allowing enough time for public input and for reasonable proposal. He assured members that staff would try to achieve the right balance between exposure to complaints later and this Committee’s desire to have the project underway in 2008.

Councillor Monette noted that in responding to previous questions, Mr. Grandmaître had acknowledged that his proposal did not meet the City’s criteria and he had confirmed that he would be prepared to bid on an RFP. He asked staff whether the Ottawa Option proposal had gone public so that people could comment on it. Mr. Burry indicated it had not.

Responding to further questions from Councillor Monette, Mr. Burry indicated the City was not bound by the P3 process in that, until Council had approved a preferred partner in terms of the negotiations, the process could be stopped at any point. He re-iterated that he did not believe going with the Ottawa Option instead of an RFP process would save any significant time and he confirmed that, should the community want an information session after the proposals had been received, staff would be willing to look at that.

Councillor Monette believed the community wanted to have a say in this project and he felt the RFP process was the way to go.

Councillor Chiarelli referenced the City’s policy, noting that it existed to protect innovators from having their competitors take advantage of their ideas and to protect Council from improperly sole-sourcing. However, he suggested that if neither of those issues were of concern in this particular instance, then Council retained the right to make the decision and move on it.

Councillor Deans expressed concerns with respect to the water quality problems at Petrie Island and maintained that if the City was going to invest in the facility, it would be important to address the issues to ensure people were able to fully enjoy the beach and swim in the water.

Responding to the Councillor’s questions on this issue, Mr. Burry indicated that last summer, there were 45 days during which “no swim” advisory were issued at Petrie Island beach, approximately half the summer. He acknowledged that other beaches were closed fewer days than that. However, he noted that other measures had been taken at the other beaches. He explained that Public Health staff had been doing testing and trying to determine the source of and reasons for the e-coli at that location. He maintained that irrespective of the “no swim” advisories, the attendance numbers at Petrie Island were substantial and the number 1 complaint is the lack of facilities; toilets and sanitary conditions.

Mr. Grandmaître expressed support for what staff was doing with respect to the water quality issues at Petrie Island. However, he maintained that the beach was only one activity on Petrie Island and that the location had tremendous potential for other activities.

As the ward Councillor, Councillor Monette indicated he would support the Ottawa Option if it came under the P3 proposal and it was the one selected. He maintained the need to have an open and transparent process and to develop the location correctly. He felt it was important to get as many proposals as possible so that the City could make the best decision for Petrie Island. He believed the P3 process would also allow the City to evaluate all the options in a fair and equitable manner.

Mayor O’Brien advised members that Councillor Bloess had submitted a motion calling for an expedited RFP process that would see a report before Committee and Council by September.

Mr. R. Diotte, a resident, felt this was a serious subject and he maintained that beaches were for everyone, not just those residents living in the area. He indicated he was a centre-town resident and that he had been to Petrie Island 3 times last year so he cared very much about what happened there. He spoke in support of the staff recommendations, with a P3 process and RFP. He wondered how much the City had already invested in Petrie Island and how much would be spent maintaining the facility. He discussed the various types of businesses and services that could be located on Petrie Island and spoke against given exclusive rights to one proponent. Instead, he suggested the City should design the site with future profits in mind. He maintained that would be in the best interest of Ottawa rate payers.

Councillor Bloess acknowledged that the facility was intended for the entire community and assured the speaker that the intent of his motion was to move forward with the staff recommendation, but with expedited timelines. With respect to his motion, he acknowledged that the timelines would be putting staff’s feet to the fire but he felt this project needed to be pushed forward.

The Committee also received a written submission from Len Goddard, Executive Director of Sonshine Community Ministries dated April 16, 2007. This document is held on file with the City Clerk.

Moved by Councillor R. Bloess

Be it resolved that the RFP be expedited to have a report for decision before Committee and Council in September 2007.

CARRIED

Committee then voted on the report recommendations, as amended by the above-noted motion.

That the Corporate Services and Economic Development Committee recommend Council approve:

2. That the Request for Proposal reflects the City’s potential capital contribution towards the construction of beach pavilion, previously approved capital budget, to a maximum of $900,000.00; and

3. That the RFP process be expedited to have a report for decision before Committee and Council in September 2007.

CARRIED as amended

Document 1

4.0 Planning and Development

5.0 Beach Pavilion Basic Building Program to be expanded

Components

Approx. square footage

Comments

8.0 Operation and Management Services

9.0 Timing