|
1. POLICY FOR SURPLUS SCHOOLS POLITIQUE CONCERNANT LES ÉCOLES EXCÉDENTAIRES |
That Council approve the following:
1.
Direct staff to
undertake an evaluation and prioritisation of school sites for the purpose of
identifying sites that would meet City needs should they be declared surplus.
2. That these priorities be reviewed on an annual
basis.
3.
Direct staff to establish criteria for the
evaluation of surplus schools sites for review and approval by the Agricultural
and Rural Affairs Committee, Planning and Environment Committee and Council
after which staff be directed to undertake an evaluation and prioritisation of
school sites for the purpose of identifying sites that would meet City needs
should they be declared surplus or are already surplus.
4. That
a funding strategy be brought forward for the 2008 Budget in order to acquire
school board property that qualifies.
1. Donne instruction au personnel de
procéder à l'évaluation et à la priorisation des terrains scolaires afin de
déterminer ceux qui répondraient aux besoins de la Ville s'ils devaient être
déclarés excédentaires, et;
2. Que
ces priorités fassent l'objet d'un
examen annuel.
3. Demande au personnel d’établir des critères
d’évaluation des emplacements scolaires excédentaires pour examen et
approbation par le Comité de l’agriculture et des questions rurales, le Comité
de l’urbanisme et de l’environnement et le Conseil, après quoi le personnel
recevra instruction de procéder à l’évaluation et à la priorisation des
emplacements scolaires, en vue de déterminer ceux qui répondraient aux besoins
de la Ville s’ils devaient être déclarés excédentaires ou s’ils le sont déjà.
4. Que soit présentée, en vue du budget de
2008, une stratégie de financement pour l'acquisition des propriétés scolaires
répondant aux conditions requises.
That Council approve the
following:
1. That, where a school board within the City
of Ottawa offers a school site as surplus to its educational needs, the City of
Ottawa indicate an interest in acquiring this site on a case by case basis.
2. Direct staff to establish criteria for the
evaluation of surplus schools sites for review and approval by the Agricultural
and Rural Affairs Committee, Planning and Environment Committee and Council
after which staff be directed to undertake an evaluation and prioritisation of
school sites for the purpose of identifying sites that would meet City needs
should they be declared surplus or are already surplus.
3. That these priorities be reviewed on an annual
basis.
Que le Conseil approuve ce qui suit :
1. Que, dans les cas où des conseils scolaires
du territoire d’Ottawa offrent des emplacements scolaires excédentaires, la
Ville d’Ottawa fasse part de son intérêt pour l’acquisition de ces sites au cas
par cas;
2. Que le Conseil demande au personnel
d’établir des critères d’évaluation des emplacements scolaires excédentaires
pour examen et approbation par le Comité de l’agriculture et des questions
rurales, le Comité de l’urbanisme et de l’environnement et le Conseil, après
quoi le personnel recevra instruction de procéder à l’évaluation et à la
priorisation des emplacements scolaires, en vue de déterminer ceux qui
répondraient aux besoins de la Ville s’ils devaient être déclarés excédentaires
ou s’ils le sont déjà.
3. Que ces priorités soient réexaminées chaque
année.
Documentation
1.
Deputy
City Manager's report Planning, Transit
and the Environment dated
22 May 2007 (ACS2007-PTE-POL-0033).
2.
Extract
of Draft Minutes, 26 June 2007 (Planning and Environment Committee).
3.
Extract of
Draft Minutes, 14 June 2007 (Agriculture and Rural Affairs Committee)
follows the French version of the report.
Report to/Rapport au :
Planning and Environment Committee
Comité de l'urbanisme et de l'environnement
and /
et
Council / et au Conseil
Submitted by/Soumis par : Nancy Schepers, Deputy City Manager/
Directrice municipale adjointe,
Planning, Transit and the
Environment/ Urbanisme, Transport en commun et Environnement
Contact
Person/Personne ressource : Richard Kilstrom, Manager/Gestionnaire, Community
Planning and Design/Aménagement et conception communautaire, Planning
Branch/Direction de l’urbanisme
(613) 580-2424 x 22653 Richard Kilstrom@ottawa.ca
|
SUBJECT: |
|
|
|
|
|
OBJET : |
REPORT RECOMMENDATION
That Planning and Environment Committee recommend that:
1.
Council direct
staff to undertake an evaluation and prioritisation of school sites for the
purpose of identifying sites that would meet City needs should they be declared
surplus.
2.
These priorities be
reviewed on an annual basis.
Que le Comité de
l'urbanisme et de l'environnement recommande que :
1. Le Conseil donne instruction au personnel de procéder à l'évaluation et à la priorisation des terrains scolaires afin de déterminer ceux qui répondraient aux besoins de la Ville s'ils devaient être déclarés excédentaires;
2. Ces
priorités fassent l'objet d'un examen annuel.
The purpose of this report is to respond to a Council direction to bring forward a report detailing a policy for the purchase of surplus school sites. The City’s current policies related to schools and the acquisition of real property are appropriate and do not require change or enhancement. However, the report recommends changes to, and the formalization of, the process by which the City evaluates individual school properties when they are circulated for sale.
The intent of these recommendations is to ensure that:
· important school properties are retained for their community and greenspace benefit; and
· the process of assessing the importance of a school property is consistent, transparent and conforms to the City’s policy for the acquisition of real property.
The City recognises the role school properties play in communities, both as a source of open space, and the existing or potential use of the buildings as community space. In older urban and most rural communities, schools often supplement parkland and the provision of community space that would otherwise be provided by the City and funded by development, as is the case in newer urban locations. As a consequence the closure and disposal of school properties by School Boards can have significant impacts on some communities, particularly mature ones. With changing demographics and the renewal and intensification of older communities inside the Greenbelt, the demand for community amenities found on school sites is likely to increase. The City’s Official Plan recognises the role that schools may play and commits the City to working with School Boards and public and private partners to retain surplus school properties in public ownership where possible.
Provincial legislation requires that school properties that are declared surplus by a School Board be offered to: other School Boards, Colleges and Universities; Federal, Provincial, and Municipal levels of government and then to the public, with School Boards, Colleges and Universities given priority. In practice the properties are simultaneously offered to all but the public and any municipal interest is considered after the educational interest is addressed. If the government agencies and municipality have no interest, the property is advertised publicly.
City records show that between August 1999 and November 2006 approximately 75 School Board properties (lands owned by School Boards including schools) were offered to the City of Ottawa. The City expressed an interest in twelve properties. However, School Boards, who exercised their priority in the acquisition process, purchased all but one of these properties.
The City did acquire part of the Presault School (sports field component) in 2004, from the French Catholic School Board.
According to information compiled by staff on sales of School Board properties, of the 75 sites declared surplus since August 1999, the private Sector purchased approximately 30% of the sites. School Boards, private educational establishments, community organisations or other institutions acquired the majority of the remaining school properties.
The provincial legislation related to the disposal of school property requires School Boards to provide a period of not less than 90 days to obtain a response from other Boards, Provincial agencies and the municipality. Responses require confirmation of a willingness to purchase and a purchase price. With the exception of other School Boards, the purchase price is based upon market value of the land and building, which is determined based on the highest and best use. In older urban communities, schools are generally older and smaller. However, the market value of the land is high. In rural areas the sites are generally larger, but land values tend to be lower.
DISCUSSION
Current Review Process
City Staff have delegated authority to review and respond to offers of surplus property. Upon receipt of an offer of a surplus school property, Real Property and Asset Management (RPAM) circulates the details to the ward Councillor and to all departments. Notice of interest in the property must be returned to RPAM within 30 days and must include an indication of what funds are available. Where more than one department is interested, RPAM will co-ordinate a joint offer or determine which department should have priority. In some cases a department may seek to interest community and private partners to finance a joint offer for the site. RPAM also has ongoing demands for land or building space to accommodate a variety of City needs which individually do not warrant acquisition of a site, but which can supplement a program need.
If an interest is identified, RPAM undertakes evaluation of the property, obtains an appraisal to estimate the market value, prepares an offer and responds to the School Board. If there is no interest expressed by any City department, or where an interest has no approved funding, RPAM advises the Board that the City is not interested in acquiring the land.
Strengths and Weaknesses
There are strengths and weaknesses in this process. The strengths are policy-based and are consistent with the corporate policy for Acquisition of Real Property that was adopted by Council on 11 April 2007.
These strengths are:
· acquisition is linked to an identified policy or program of the City
· acquisition is supported by a budget to acquire, to develop or redevelop, to program and to maintain the property
· all departments are included in the review.
The weaknesses are more process-related and are:
· School sites are offered without any predictability, which makes the current process reactive rather than proactive
· A proactive approach to the assessment of surplus schools is difficult because there are few community-based assessments that identify and prioritise the role or potential role of different school sites in the community
· The decision and reasons to acquire or not acquire are not communicated back to the participants in most cases
· The response time to express interest and make an offer is often insufficient to create partnerships, especially those that incorporate community or private partners
· Departments may not have the funds identified and approved to acquire the schools.
Policy Recommendation
The policies of the City’s Official Plan (section 5.2.1 (4)) provide that the City may acquire land within its boundaries for the purpose of implementing any policy of the Plan. In addition the City has a corporate policy for “Acquisition of Real Property”. This corporate policy is sufficient to guide the acquisition of any land that meets an identified corporate program, including surplus school properties. Given that Council has already adopted these two policies, a more refined policy for school properties is not considered necessary.
Process Recommendations
It is, however, necessary to enhance the current process of evaluating surplus school sites and provide funding to acquire these sites where they meet identified City needs. This can be addressed in the following ways:
1.
Increase the time to consider possible acquisitions and
create partnerships;
City staff can begin evaluating and prioritising school sites when the School Boards identify groups of schools for possible closure, and then increase the detail of the review when they are closed. This pre-screening gives high-level prioritisation of sites and additional time to refine priorities before schools are declared surplus and sold. Staff recommends that this proactive evaluation of priority schools be implemented. Since not all schools are declared surplus when they are closed, City priorities can be reviewed annually and this review will allow departments to adjust their programs and funding accordingly.
2.
Improving consistency in the way schools will be evaluated
by the City
Consistency in the way school sites are evaluated can be achieved by moving from a reactive to a proactive review using universally agreed-upon criteria. Many of the criteria are already in policies in the City’s Official Plan or form part of citywide programs and long-range plans. For example, the Official Plan establishes the desired levels of park and greenspace provision in communities, the Sportsfield strategy identifies demands for sports fields in different areas of the city, and the City has adopted a “Housing First” policy for its own lands which can also be used to evaluate school properties.
There are a number of City departments which also provide for emergency services and similar uses based upon population or location-based criteria, and have need for land from time to time. Compilation of criteria has already begun, and it is recommended that this work be completed to form the basis of the evaluation criteria that will support the pre-screening process and prioritisation of school sites.
3.
Providing feedback when decisions are made
Currently, the Ward Councillor and departments are included at the beginning of the departmental circulation of a surplus school property. After the circulation, there is no reporting back to the Councillor or staff who have participated in the process. Other Councillors and some staff may only hear of the results if a report is made to Corporate Services Committee concerning a proposed acquisition. If there is no interest in the site, only the School Board is advised. This process should be improved to include all Councillors in the initial circulation and ensure that the results of the circulation are reported back to those who participated, whether the recommendation is to acquire or not.
It is recommended that RPAM modify the current City circulation process to broaden consultation and provide feedback.
CONSULTATION WITH STAFF AND COUNCILLOR
In preparing this report Staff consulted other departments and with Real Property and Asset Management and they concur with the recommendations contained herein.
As the originator of the Council direction to staff, staff discussed the recommendations of this report with Councillor Cullen, who has recommended that staff take a different approach. This approach recognises that the City is only eligible to acquire surplus school sites that are no longer being used for educational purposes but provides a more aggressive acquisition model that is not dependent upon existing programs or approved budgets. In this model the undertaking to acquire would be nearly automatic, with the City offering to acquire every school that is circulated for disposal. A report would be presented to Committee and Council to acquire each surplus school site and approve a funding mechanism. Public consultation to discuss possible re-use of the property would follow the completion of the purchase.
The model could include mechanisms whereby staff could recommend against such a purchase where there is an overabundance of park space or nearby sports fields or a surfeit of community amenity space. However, this would be an exception to this scenario, a building, even in poor condition, should not be grounds for rejecting the purchase, as the building could be renovated or demolished. The remaining land (and its associated amenities) could still be used as a park asset for the community. Another variation on this model would be to support a separate track, using the staff-recommended approach, for high school properties which are larger, have considerably more building space, will be much more expensive to purchase, and are rarely closed.
The use of debt (debenture) to acquire these properties was suggested rather than establishing a reserve fund.
This is a borrowing of finite length (10 or 20 years), and at the end of this period the site is owned by the City (i.e. the public) and has been paid for. By contrast, a reserve fund places a constraint on how many (if any) schools can be purchased at any time, based upon the level of funding available.
The ‘acquire all’ approach to acquisition has a number of drawbacks that suggests this approach should not be recommended:
· the City will be required to do detailed evaluations and have market appraisals on every site circulated to the City
· historical data suggests that an average of 4 sites have be disposed of per year with an average market value of approximately $2 million
· the City will assume all interim costs and liability associated with ownership, improvement or demolition, and ongoing management of the site even if there is no program for the land and/or building in the near future.
· is contrary to the way the City acquires all other land in the City with the exception of railway rights-of-way which have fewer potential users, and a longer timeframe is provided to secure funds
· presumes that land ownership should be the driver for the provision of City services and programs, and not the reverse
· removes delegation from staff and will require each response to the School Boards to be endorsed by Council, which will also approve the additional debt
· assumes that the smaller school sites are always useful to community development, while the preferred approach is to evaluate all sites and to prioritise them by their cost/benefit.
FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS
There are no funds available in the 2007 budget for this initiative. The costs related to a high level evaluation will be reviewed by RPAM and considered part of the 2008 budget process.
SUPPORTING DOCUMENTATION
N/A
DISPOSITION
The Staff of RPAM take steps to modify the current process used to review surplus school properties in accordance with the Council’s determination of the recommendations to this report.