|
7.
AMENDMENT TO THE
DEVELOPMENT CHARGES BY-LAW 2009-216 WITH RESPECT TO THE PARKS DEVELOPMENT
SERVICE COMPONENT Modification au Règlement no 2009-216 sur
les redevances d’aménagement en ce qui a trait au volet du service de
l’aménagement des parcs |
Committee recommendation
That Council approve an amendment to Development
Charges By-law 2009-216 with respect to the Parks Development service
component.
Recommandation du comité
Que le Conseil approuve une modification aux Règlement no 2009-216
sur les redevances d’aménagement en ce qui a trait au volet du service de
l’aménagement des parcs.
Documentation
1.
Deputy
City Manager's report, Infrastructure
Services and Community Sustainability, dated 12 January 2011 (ACS2011-ICS-PGM-0041).
2.
Planning
Committee Extract of Draft Minutes of 25 January 2011.
Report to/Rapport au :
and Council / et au Conseil
12 January 2011 / le 12 janvier 2011
Submitted by/Soumis par : Nancy Schepers, Deputy City Manager/Directrice municipale adjointe,
Infrastructure Services and Community Sustainability/Services d’infrastructure
et Viabilité des collectivités
Contact Person/Personne ressource : John L. Moser, General Manager,
Planning and Growth Management, Planning and Growth Management/Urbanisme et
Gestion de la croissance
(613) 580-2424 x28869, John.Moser@ottawa.ca
That
Planning Committee recommend Council approve an amendment to Development
Charges By-law 2009-216 with respect to the Parks Development service
component.
Que le Comité de
l’urbanisme recommande au Conseil d’approuver une modification aux Règlement no 2009-216
sur les redevances d’aménagement en ce qui a trait au volet du service de
l’aménagement des parcs.
The purpose of this report and the supporting documentation is to revise the Parks Development service component within the existing development charge rate structure set out in By-law 216 of 2009. Staff and various stakeholders have agreed to adopt a new strategy to enable the City to advance future parks and trail construction. Revisions to the current framework reflect the need for the overall capital program to provide for timely implementation of growth-related infrastructure for new residents and to prevent declining levels of service to existing residents.
The 2009 parks-related charge was based on a capital program designed to provide for the needs of development as anticipated at the time, but also within the historical level of service limitations. Unfortunately, the level of service calculations negatively impact the City's ability to fund parks and trails. It is acknowledged that the level of service is the single most significant factor contributing to the current shortfall; however, it is not within the City's legislative mandate to amend the regulatory requirements. For purposes of this by-law amendment, the City will continue to work with the current growth forecast in the 2009 Background Study with the proposed rate recalculation allowing for acceleration and increase in the capacity to deliver this particular community based program.
The City currently operates 2,906 hectares of active and passive parkland and an array of park structures. The 10-year growth-related capital program for Parks Development amounts to $54.3 million, which is comprised of new neighbourhood, community, passive parks and trails. This is the maximum allowable based on the average historical level of service calculation and is $28 million less than the 2004 gross capital costs. For the purpose of Parkland Development, the local service requirements have been revised to include additional components in the City's development charge calculation. The recalculation of the rates in the proposed by-law adjusts the 10-year capital program by $52.2 million, which will be used to meet the increased needs of growth.
Since the adoption of the new Development Charges (DC) by-law it has become increasingly apparent that the revenues being generated by the parks component are insufficient to allow for the timely delivery of growth-related infrastructure. The Council Sponsorship Group identified during the 2009 development charge review process that the City faced escalating requirements for community based infrastructure and improvements underlying the growth-related work plan. For example, during the discussions with stakeholders there was an agreement to increase the parks service rate component in order to maximize the unused level of service-cap room. This resulted in an increase of approximately $409 in the Outside the Greenbelt parks and trails charge.
This proposed provision is the next step in the revised funding framework for providing community infrastructure necessary to accommodate growth and to demonstrate a commitment as to how infrastructure may be funded in a timely manner. It recognizes the City's obligation to ensure that capital works are funded from appropriate sources and implemented in a timely manner to support growth. The detailed examination, in conjunction with the industry, involved all of the key assumptions underlying the parks and trails development charge calculation. Some of the parks related issues addressed at the various stakeholder meetings included the current capital budget and forecast, the 10-year historical average service level, overall infrastructure cost estimates and reserve fund analysis.
During the time of approval of DC By-law 2009-216, a number of adjustments to the Parks Development service component were applied to increase this portion of the charge. In spite of the changes, the rate fails to provide funding of a substantial portion of development-related costs. The current schedule is only sufficient to generate approximately $45.7 million in parks and trails growth-related capital funding for the period 2010-2019, representing only a fraction of the required construction program.
The objective of this amendment is to respond to concerns regarding implementation of the development of parkland to service the numerous developing residential communities. Staff have decided to recommend an innovative approach to parks construction that is jointly driven by the City and the development industry, which integrates the Council Sponsorship Group's mandate concerning the timely provision of public infrastructure. The City's revised policy is to include additional park-related components within the growth-related calculation framework. The impact of this policy shift will be monitored, to determine if it has indeed met the needs of the communities in the growth areas of the city located outside the greenbelt.
Under the proposed amendment, the average replacement cost of the full inventory over the past 10 years and based on cost per developed hectare per kilometre, now stands at $451,500 per hectare for Active Parks (increased from $293,284), $142,650 per hectare for Passive Parks (increased from $20,057) and $325,000 per kilometre for Community Trails (increased from $88,160). The qualitative service changes reflect the City’s increased overall requirement to dedicate new parkland. The result is a revised 10-year historical average service level of $990 per capita for the provision of parks and trails. Based on the population forecast of 107,600 of persons and the average service level of $990 per capita, the new maximum allowable amount eligible for inclusion in the development charge calculation is $106.5 million. A portion of which, $7.6 million, represents the non-growth share to be recovered through contributions from cash-in-lieu of parkland or prior growth funding sources. As required by the Development Charges Act for parks, the growth-related capital cost of must be reduced or discounted by 10 per cent or $9.9 million ($98.9 million x 10 per cent).
This re-examination allows for the systematic implementation of installation of parks by providing greater predictability to the provision of facilities to new homebuyers. Future capital budgets presented on a yearly basis will identify the required funding to service anticipated growth in the City. While construction will continue to be based on the availability of funding, there will be an option to front-end park-related capital works, which is also expected to be a key component in achieving the City’s share for providing community friendly municipal infrastructure. Some of the projects in the growth-related capital forecast are non-site specific but are intended to implement approved plans and strategies.
CONCLUSION
The goal at the outset was to conduct a process where information required for the review was freely available for discussion and debate. In comparison to the 2009 DC study, the scope of the parks program incorporated into the amendment has been widened in favour of an approach that would result in more of the capital works being provided by the City. This shift in funding approach is consistent with the City attempting to address a mounting backlog of growth-related park and trail requirements.
The principle changes made in revisiting the calculation were to:
• increase the quality measure value for active parks, passive parks and community trails;
• provide for a new maximum allowable capital cost amount of $106.5 million, which is an increase of $52.2 million;
• increase the net capital cost that relates to growth to $89.1 million from $45.7 million;
• allocate the net growth capital cost component between residential - $84.7 million and non-residential - $4.4 million.
More than 150 years ago Frederick Law Olmsted, the landscape architect who created Central Park, recognized that: Parks are vital parts of urban infrastructure that not only enhance the quality of life in neighbourhoods but also help to stimulate economic growth.
The proposed rate increase in the parks service component will result in a slight adjustment in the trail component of the rural charge.
The development industry and staff met several times to discuss issues of common concern relating to the parks service component. The extensive consultation involved a detailed examination of all of the key assumptions underlying the revised calculation. As required by the Development Charges Act, notice of this public meeting was posted in the newspaper on January 4, 2011. Copies of the draft Background Study were made available on January 5 on request.
The adoption of this report and the enactment of the amending by-law will resolve one of the appeals to the Development Charges By-law.
Planning and Growth Management objectives:
The development charge rates reflected in this amendment are a reasonable representation of the anticipated costs resulting from projected growth, over the planning horizon used to predict the need for the parks service component. By approving this recalculation of the Parks Development rate, the City will realize an estimated $4.3 million in additional annual growth-related contributions. The total 10-year revenue estimate of $89.1 million is split $84.7 million from residential and $4.4 million from non-residential development. The 10-year non-growth related capital requirements are forecast to be $17.4 million. The parks capital program will still be subject to approval of Council through the annual budget review process. Part of the increase in growth-related contributions will be used to bring parks to final design grade (which was previously the responsibility of the developers) as outlined in report ACS2001-ICS-PGM-0042.
Document 1 Schedule of Development Charge Recoverable Rates for Parks and Trails
Document 2 Parks Development - Summary of Development Charge Recoverable Cost Calculations
Document 3 Draft By-law
The revised Park Development rates will take effect as of February 9, 2011. There is no transition or phase-in of the new rates.
SCHEDULE OF DEVELOPMENT CHARGE RECOVERABLE RATES
FOR PARKS AND TRAILS DOCUMENT 1
|
Schedule
of Development Charge Recoverable Rates for Parks and Trails |
|||
|
Residential |
Proposed |
2009 |
|
|
(excluding indexing) |
Residential |
Residential |
|
|
|
Rates |
Rates |
Adjustment |
|
|
(per unit) |
(per unit) |
(per unit) |
|
Inside the Greenbelt |
|
|
|
|
Single and
Semi-detached |
$336 |
$164 |
$172 |
|
Multiple, Row and
Mobile Dwelling |
$236 |
$115 |
$121 |
|
Apartment - 2
Bedroom, Stacked Townhouse |
$164 |
$80 |
$84 |
|
Apartment - 1 Bedroom |
$133 |
$65 |
$68 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Outside the Greenbelt |
|
|
|
|
Single and
Semi-detached |
$2,409 |
$1,148 |
$1,261 |
|
Multiple, Row and
Mobile Dwelling |
$1,828 |
$871 |
$957 |
|
Apartment - 2
Bedroom, Stacked Townhouse |
$1,368 |
$652 |
$716 |
|
Apartment - 1 Bedroom |
$950 |
$453 |
$497 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rural |
|
|
|
|
Single and
Semi-detached |
$1,043 |
$988 |
$54 |
|
Multiple, Row and
Mobile Dwelling |
$823 |
$780 |
$43 |
|
Apartment - 2
Bedroom, Stacked Townhouse |
$546 |
$518 |
$29 |
|
Apartment - 1 Bedroom |
$446 |
$423 |
$23 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Non-residential |
Proposed |
2009 |
|
|
(excluding indexing) |
Non-Residential |
Non-Residential |
|
|
|
Rates |
Rates |
Adjustment |
|
|
($ per sq.ft.) |
($ per sq.ft.) |
($ per sq.ft.) |
|
Non-residential -
General Use |
0.16 |
0.07 |
0.09 |
|
Commercial,
Institutional, and Industrial Use |
0.13 |
0.06 |
0.07 |
|
Industrial (Limited)
Use |
0.08 |
0.03 |
0.04 |
PARKS DEVELOPMENT - SUMMARY OF DEVELOPMENT CHARGE RECOVERABLE COST CALCULATIONS DOCUMENT 2
Parks
Development
Summary
of Development Charge Recoverable Cost Calculations
Development Charges
Calculation Planning Period
February
2011 to 2019
Service Coverage
and Capital Program
Coverage:
Hard/soft landscaping such as grading, drainage, seeding/sodding, sports
fields, courts, related development items, capital program for active
neighbourhood, community-wide and passive parks and trails. In accordance with Subsection 2(4.4) of the Development Charges Act (DCA), the acquisition of lands for
parks cannot be funded from development charges.
Capital Program: The
parks development program, including trails, was established based on projected
needs by facility type for specific geographic locations during the period
covered by the Development Charges by-law.
Local Service and
Developer Contribution Policy
The
developer is to provide rough grading in accordance with the grading plan
approved prior to subdivision registration, including tree removal required to
complete this grading. Grading to final
park design is a city responsibility. If
tree removal is not required as part of the rough grading then tree removal is
a city responsibility. Developers are responsible for the provision of sanitary
and stormwater and 50 mm (minimum) water service and hydro stubbed two (2)
metres inside the property line. All
other development of the land, including the supply and grading of topsoil,
drainage, seeding/sodding, landscaping and related items are development charge
project components. Development charges
shall fund community trails located around watercourses, hydro corridors and
urban natural features. The developer
shall be responsible for all connections to park blocks, walkway blocks, and
stormwater management ponds blocks within the subdivision that link
neighbourhoods and/or allow subdivisions to be connected by pedestrian routes.
Level of Service
Measurements
Changes
to the quality values of the service standard calculations have increased the
overall level of service measurement.
There are separate schedules for trails (km/capita) and active vs.
passive parks (ha/capita). The revised inventory value reflects the cost of
developing parkland and trails, but does not include the land component. The City requires development to provide parkland
dedication under the Planning Act.
Benefit to Existing
Development Deduction
Deductions
for benefit to existing residents range from 0 to 25 per cent depending on the
location and anticipated use of the park or trail. A 5-10 per cent deduction has been made for
community parks and active district parks. A 25 per cent deduction for benefit
to existing residents has been made for all passive parks and trails. The reason why the deduction is higher for
passive parks and trails is that the capture area is broader and, unlike active
neighbourhood parks, they are expected to service more than just new
subdivisions. No deduction for benefit to existing residents has been made for
park credits carried forward or for the majority of neighbourhood park
projects.
Post
Period/Excess Capacity Deduction
Parks
level of service is similar to the City's historical 10-year average. As a result, there is no excess capacity in
the service component.
Provision for
Grants, Subsidies and Other Contributions
No
grants, subsidies or other contributions are anticipated for any of the
Parkland Development capital projects included in the calculation.
10 Per cent
Statutory Deduction
A
deduction of 10 per cent has been made from development charges recoverable
costs in accordance with subsection 5(1), paragraph 8 of the DCA.
Use of Uncommitted
DC Reserve Fund Balance
Uncommitted
development charges reserve funds are to be used to fund the non-growth
recoverable costs of future development charge projects.
Residential Versus
Non-Residential Allocation
The
net costs benefitting new development have been allocated as follows: 95 per
cent to residential development, recognizing that most demand is residential
and 5 per cent to non-residential development based on limited usage and
current municipal norms.
Area-Specific Cost
Allocation
Residential Charge: Parks
have been allocated on a large area recovery basis, consistent with the
neighbourhood and community focus of the program.
Non-residential
Charge: Parks have been allocated on a uniform,
city-wide basis in order to reflect current policy, industry input and to
encourage employment growth to the fullest extent possible and throughout the
City.
Long Term Capital
and Operating Implications
Average
annual lifecycle costs for all park types is $10,467/ha, although additional
parkland will increase operating costs.
The average annual cost to maintain active and passive parkland is
$8,980/ha plus an additional 3% annually from 2010 onward. Typical operating
costs include maintenance of playgrounds, sports fields, splash pads, public
(urban) squares, park pathways, grass, shrubs and trees. Actual costs per hectare will vary with each
park depending on the type of park and the facilities provided. Operating costs for trails are estimated to
be $1.00/linear metre, including erosion repair, slope stabilisation, tree
trimming, grass cutting and, where applicable, sweeping and snow removal.
Reporting
Future
meetings will be held to monitor progress, review assumptions and discuss
interim results. The annual Treasurer’s
report will include updates to ensure that the construction of new parks and
trails meets the revised funding plan milestones.
Timetable
Implementation
is targeted for February 9 and the report will be available for review in
January. Budgeted costs shown in the
revised calculation will be used to adjust the 2011 Capital Budget for a number
of projects to reflect the City’s increased servicing coverage.
DRAFT BY-LAW DOCUMENT 3
BY-LAW NO. 2011 -
A By-law of the City of Ottawa to amend By-Law No. 2009-216 of the City
of Ottawa respecting the imposition of development charges.
The
Council of the City of Ottawa enacts as follows:
1.
By-Law
No. 2009-216 is amended as follows by the addition of the following section:
8A. PARKS DEVELOPMENT CHARGE
(1)
Despite
any other provision in this by-law, the parks development charge imposed
through sections 5 and 6 of this by-law shall be determined in accordance with
this section and not in accordance with Schedules B and C.
(2)
The
parks development charge shall be, effective the date of enactment of this
by-law, determined in accordance with the following table and not Schedules B
and C.
|
Residential Development Charge-Inside the
Greenbelt (Area #1) |
|||
|
Single
and Semi-Detached |
Apartment
Dwelling and Back to Back and Stacked Townhouse (2+
bedrooms) |
Apartment
(less than 2 bedrooms) |
Multiple,
row and mobile dwelling |
|
$336(per unit) |
$164(per unit) |
$133(per unit) |
$236(per unit) |
|
Residential Development Charge-Inside the
Greenbelt (Area #2) |
|||
|
Single
and Semi-Detached |
Apartment
Dwelling and Back to Back and Stacked Townhouse (2+
bedrooms) |
Apartment
(less than 2 bedrooms) |
Multiple,
row and mobile dwelling |
|
$1,368(per unit) |
$950(per unit) |
$1,828(per unit) |
|
|
Residential Development Charge-Rural
Serviced (Area #3 Part) |
|||
|
Single
and Semi-Detached |
Apartment
Dwelling and Back to Back and Stacked Townhouse (2+
bedrooms) |
Apartment
(less than 2 bedrooms) |
Multiple,
row and mobile dwelling |
|
$1,043(per unit) |
$546(per unit) |
$446(per unit) |
$823(per unit) |
|
Residential Development Charge-Rural
Unserviced (Area #3 Part) |
|||
|
Single
and Semi-Detached |
Apartment
Dwelling and Back to Back and Stacked Townhouse (2+
bedrooms) |
Apartment
(less than 2 bedrooms) |
Multiple,
row and mobile dwelling |
|
$1,043(per unit) |
$546(per unit) |
$446(per unit) |
$823(per unit) |
|
Non-Residential Development
Charge-City-Wide (Per Square Foot) |
|||
|
Non-Residential-General
Use |
$0.16 |
||
|
Commercial,
Institutional and Industrial Use |
$0.13 |
||
|
Industrial
(Limited) Use |
$0.08 |
||
(3)
The
total development charges payable in Schedules B and C shall be deemed to be
increased to include the charges set out above in this section.
(4)
The parks development charge is not subject to
the transitional provision set forth in subsections 11 (1) to (4) inclusive.
(5)
The
parks development charge shall be indexed in accordance with section 17
commencing August 1, 2011.
2. This by-law
shall come into force and take effect on the 9th day of February,
2011.
ENACTED AND PASSED this
9th day of February, 2011.
CITY CLERK MAYOR
AMENDMENT TO THE DEVELOPMENT CHARGES BY-LAW 2009-216 WITH RESPECT TO THE PARKS DEVELOPMENT SERVICE COMPONENT
MODIFICATION AU RÈGLEMENT NO
2009-216 SUR LES REDEVANCES D’AMÉNAGEMENT EN CE QUI A TRAIT AU VOLET DU SERVICE
DE L’AMÉNAGEMENT DES PARCS
ACS2011-ICS-PGM-0041 CITY WIDE/À
L'ÉCHELLE DE LA VILLE
Committee considered and heard delegations on four reports pertaining to provision of parkland, listed as Items 8 through 11 on the agenda:
·
Item 8 - Cash-in-lieu of Parkland Funds Policy
·
Item 9 - Park and Trail Front-Ending Policy
·
Item 10 - Amendment to the Development Charges By-Law
2009-216 with respect to the Parks Development Service Component
· Item 11 - Amendment to the Conditions for Draft Approval of Plan of Subdivision – Parks
Committee discussed these reports together, before approving each separately.
Dr. Ranjit Perera spoke to Items eight through 11 (Cash-in-lieu of Parkland Funds Policy; Park and Trail Front-Ending Policy; Amendment to the Development Charges By-Law 2009-216 with respect to the Parks Development Service Component; and Amendment to the Conditions for Draft Approval of Plan of Subdivision – Parks) He noted that he had a development application in Cumberland, and had obtained draft plan approval, but the process had been going on for three years. He noted that he had appeared before the Ontario Municipal Board with respect to certain conditions related to parkland approval. He objected to the fact that rural and urban areas were being treated equally with respect to the provision of parkland and associated policies. He also objected to the increase in the cost associated with parkland. Finally, he objected to the requirements that developments must meet in parkland areas, particularly for rural developments.
Pierre Dufresne, Greater Ottawa Homebuilders Association, spoke in support of Items nine through 11 (Park and Trail
Front-Ending Policy; Amendment to the Development Charges By-Law 2009-216 with respect
to the Parks Development Service Component; and
Amendment to the Conditions for Draft Approval of Plan of Subdivision –
Parks). Specifically,
he spoke to the process that led to the development of these reports, which
involved the homebuilders working with staff to develop a series of
recommendations to improve the way parkland is funded and provided for in new
developments. He suggested the new
front-ending provisions would allow developers to front-end the parks with some
recognition that they will be paid back at a committed time. With the development charge amendments, the
City would now have enough funding to complete all works within the parks, and
developers would not be asked on a site-by-site basis to complete matters that
are outside the scope of the budget. In conclusion,
he suggested this had been a successful endeavour, and looked forward to conducting business with staff in a
similar manner in the future.
Chair Hume noted that the City would be again seeking their input as
part of the next review of the Development Charge Bylaw to see what adjustments
need to be made in keeping with the principle of creating sustainable suburban
communities. He suggested these
initiatives were a positive step on the part of the industry in working towards
rectifying the deficiency in the funding for implementation of parks.
Councillor Harder
supported the relationship the City was building with development community,
suggesting it was a long time coming. She noted that they had been talking for
years about building parks faster, and the suggested this was another positive
step, building upon the 2010 initiative by Councillor Hume and herself that had
resulted in revisions
to the development charge funding policy to allow for the prioritization of the
construction of new community-based recreational infrastructure by expanding
the use of growth-related debt.
There were no questions specifically to this report. Committee approved the report recommendations, as presented.
That Planning Committee recommend Council approve an amendment to
Development Charges By-law 2009-216 with respect to the Parks Development
service component.
CARRIED