1. study of potential sports fields
|
COMMITTEE
RECOMMENDATION
That Council receive this report for information.
RECOMMANDATION
DU COMITÉ
Que le Conseil prenne connaissance du présent rapport
DOCUMENTATION
1.
Committee Coordinator, Health, Recreation and Social Services
Committee, report dated 10 March 2006 (ACS2006-CCS-HRS-0003).
2.
Extract of Minutes, 6 April 2006.
Report to/Rapport au :
Health, Recreation and Social Services Committee
Comité de la santé, des loisirs et
des services sociaux
10 March 2006 / le 10 mars 2006
Submitted by/Soumis par : Rosemary
Nelson, Committee Coordinator / Coordonnatrice du comité
Corporate Services Department /
Services généraux
Contact
Person/Personne ressource : Rosemary Nelson, Committee Coordinator
City Clerk’s Branch/Direction du greffe
(613) 580-2424 x21624, Rosemary.Nelson@ottawa.ca
|
|
Ref N°: ACS2006-CCS-HRS-0003
|
|
SUBJECT:
|
STUDY OF POTENTIAL SPORTSFIELDS SITES
|
|
|
|
|
OBJET :
|
SPORTS
|
REPORT RECOMMENDATION
That the Health, Recreation and Social Services Committee receive
this report for information.
RECOMMANDATION DU RAPPORT
Que le Comité de la santé, des
loisirs et des services sociaux prenne connaissance du présent rapport.
BACKGROUND
The attached memo from the Director of Parks and Recreation Branch
of the Community and Protective Services Department, entitled “Study of
Potential Sportsfields Sites”, Reference ACS2006-CPS-PAR-0003, was originally
issued as “Information Previously Distributed” and listed as such on the
Health, Recreation and Social Services Committee Agenda of 16 February
2006. At the meeting, committee members
requested that this item be placed on the 6 April 2006 Committee agenda as an
item for discussion.
DISCUSSION
Subsequent to the IPD originally being
submitted, the Department has requested that the following be reflected in the
2005 "Study of Potential Sportsfield Sites", prepared by Delcan:
That
non-permanent use of green space within the Alta Vista Transportation Corridor
be restricted to areas where there is sufficient land available so that
temporary uses do not interfere with the preferred alignment for the Alta Vista
Transportation Corridor and that the City erect signs indicating that any use
of the green space within Alta Vista Transportation Corridor is temporary.
This addition is in keeping with Motion 37/6 adopted by Council on 24
August 2005.
Staff in Parks
and Recreation concur with the above addition to the Delcan report.
SUPPORTING DOCUMENTATION
Document 1 - Study
of Potential Sportsfields Sites memo dated 8 Feb 06
Document 2 - Report
entitled: “Study of Potential
Sportsfields Sites” prepared by Delcan, June 2005 (Appendix B to this
report was previously distributed to all members of Council and is only
available in hard copy.)
|
REVISED
M E M
O / N O T E D E S E R V I C E
|
|
|
To /
Destinataire
|
Mayor and
Members of City Council / Le Maire et tous les members du Conseil
|
File/N° de
fichier : ACS2006-CPS-PAR-0003
|
|
From /
Expéditeur
|
Aaron Burry,
Director of Parks and Recreation Branch / Directeur de la Direction des parcs
et loisirs
|
|
|
Subject / Objet
|
Study of Potential Sportsfields Sites
Étude des
emplacements possibles de terrains de sports
|
Date : February 8, 2006
8 février 2006
|
In 2004, the
Parks and Recreation branch Sportsfield Strategy report was approved by
Committee and Council (ACS2004-PEO-COM-0004). This report outlined the branch’s strategy to address the
overwhelming demand for sportsfields across the City. In order to address the shortfall, the branch committed to
acquiring, where possible, additional lands for sportsfield development either
through purchase, land swap, or partnership with local sports organizations.
The first step
in implementing this direction was to identify if a sufficient amount of
appropriately zoned lands were available for use within the urban and rural
areas. At the same time, Planning and
Growth Management also needed information to demonstrate that there is a
sufficient inventory of appropriately zoned land to accommodate sportsfields to
deal with certain appeals to the City’s Official Plan.
Accordingly,
Planning, Environment and Infrastructure Policy Branch, in conjunction with the
Parks and Recreation Branch, jointly undertook the attached “Study of Potential
Sports fields Sites” which is being circulated for your information.
The study is one of several reference
documents and tools to be used in implementing the recommendations in the
Sportsfield Strategy and did not have as an objective to identify all lands,
sites, projects to be developed for future sports fields. The focus of the potential acquisition of
sites is to meet outstanding demand, in addition to the on-going requirement
for new fields as a result of growth.
As a matter course, through the development process of new
communities/subdivisions and the preparation of Community Design plans, field
requirements in new parks and schools continues to be planned for and
constructed. Hence, lands known to have
development plans (at the time of writing) have not been included, nor have
privately-owned lands, especially those in growth and rural areas.
Parks and
Recreation’s capital budget also includes a sportsfield development allocation,
which funds conversion from under-used types of fields to the type more in
demand, as well as space/land permitting, adding mini’s or full size
fields in existing parks. In addition,
many of the sportsfields in the city are on School Board property which become
problematic if and when such schools are declared surplus. To that end, PGM was asked to prepare a
policy to acquire vacant school sites prior to disposal for development. In response (Inquiry No. PEC-08-05) on the
status of this policy, Planning and Environment Committee were advised that the
Greenspace Master Plan will help Council and communities make decisions on
greenspace acquisition. Following
Council approval of the Greenspace Master Plan, staff will be in a position to
prepare a report for Council proposing policies for assessing the acquisition
of surplus schools that is consistent with Council’s established policies. As well, the Greenspace Master Plan will
identify parcels of land that would be required to establish a Greenspace
Network that could be used for active and/or passive recreational activities as
well as natural lands.
The Potential
Sportsfield study used five preliminary screening criteria to evaluate and
identify lands within the city that have the potential to be developed as
outdoor sportsfields.
The scope of the
study included the entire City of Ottawa (281,000 ha in total) and eliminated
lands determined not suitable in accordance with the five screening criteria as
follows:
·
Level 1 - removed parcels of land that
could not be developed for pure policy reasons (e.g., environmental land, wetlands)
·
Level
2 - removed lands that have been developed or were in the process of being
developed
·
Level
3 - removed parcels of land too small to accommodate sportsfields (minimum size
of 1.1 ha to accommodate a 90M x 120 m field)
·
Level
4 - removed lands with other physical constraints (topography, soil and
drainage issues)
·
Level
5 - used aerial photography as a checks and balances review of the screening
process
At the end of the screening process a total
of 1,502 sites (avg site 14 – 16 ha) covering a total of approximately 25,600
ha representing 9% of the total city’s land base remained as potential
sportsfield lands.
To assist in the further evaluation, a set of
“preference criteria” was established based on input received at a stakeholder
meeting (October 2004) and a meeting of the Parks and
Recreation Advisory Committee (PRAC) in February 2005. The preference criteria prioritized lands
with the following characteristics:
- Municipally owned lands
- Other publicly owned lands
- Sites adjacent to or well-connected
to other existing parks
- Sites adjacent to existing public
service amenities such as schools
- Larger sites where two or more permanent
fields can be developed
- Sites unlikely to result in
compatibility issues (e.g., parking, noise, lighting)
- Sites with sufficient road access,
and
- Sites within the transit service
area.
More than 50
sites were identified that conform to the preference criteria as set out in the
attachment to the consultant’s study.
The inventory of
priority sites is intended to form a starting point in the search for future
sportsfield sites; both by the City and in support of local sports
organizations wishing to develop prospective sites independently. Each year, as part of the budget process,
the Parks and Recreation Branch requests funds for acquisition of land for
sportsfields and organizations also seek funding as part of the Major Capital
Community Partnership Policy. Given its
combination of technical (screening) criteria and preference criteria this
study will help the City and stakeholder groups identify parcels of land that
are appropriate and worth pursuing.
Please contact
me if you have any questions or require additional information.
Aaron Burry
Author’s Initials A.B./
Prepared by Initials
Attach. Study of Potential Sportsfields Sites (Please
Note: Appendix B of the attachment is only available in paper copy)
cc: Steve Kanellakos, Deputy City Manager, CPS
Ned Lathrop, Deputy City Manager, PGM
Parks and Recreation Advisory Committee
Bruce Finlay, Planning, Environment and Infrastructure Branch
Members of Council
Aaron Burry, Director of Parks and Recreation, provided the
Committee with a brief overview of the item.
A copy of his PowerPoint Presentation is held on file.
Councillor Stavinga made note of
the priority sites identified in the Urban Area Key Map, but wondered why the
Study had not included priorities in rural areas which are close to the urban
areas and which could benefit everyone.
A Planner with the Planning and Growth Management Department, Bruce
Finlay, explained that the Study was done to identify all potential sites and
the recommendations are based primarily on public ownership; the majority of
land identified in the rural area is privately owned so the potential for a
timeline to prioritize those lands is longer.
The councillor referred to lands located between Kanata, Stittsville and
Richmond that are privately-owned, but there is either development that will
happen soon or would happen in the near future, and she thought there are
opportunities for sportsfields in those locations. Mr. Finlay advised that one of the screening criteria was whether
or not lands were in a developing community and this Study does not identify
land within developing communities. He
added that some of the shortfall in sportsfields would be made up in developing
communities, through Community Design Plans (CDPs).
The councillor was concerned,
however, that the City is not providing that link and asked whether there could
be some compendium to accompany the staff report that gives a more integrated perspective
of what the City is undertaking. Mr.
Finlay indicated that the Greenspace Master Plan is doing this to a certain
extent and the opportunity to provide that link might best be through that
document. The councillor believed that
this context needed to be provided in the staff memo because it would help to
bridge for people that there is another process happening in parallel and which
will be dovetailing together. She
suggested that the memo be clarified to reflect the greater context with regards
to the association with CDPs, surplus school sites, the Greenspace Master Plan,
existing subdivisions that are already approved and how the local and district
parks have been identified, et cetera.
The Director agreed to provide an additional paragraph, indicating that
this Study is one element of a bigger undertaking under Planning and Growth
Management with regards to the identification of sportsfields within the
context of emerging communities.
Councillor Cullen noted that
Rochester Field (#47 on the Urban Area Key Map) is part of the Richmond
Road/Westboro CDP currently underway and he wanted assurance that the Planner
for that process is aware that it is being considered as a potential
sportsfield site. Mr. Burry confirmed
that staff from Parks and Recreation are involved in CDPs, to ensure those
interests and concerns are well represented.
The councillor further noted that staff have been asked to develop a
policy to purchase surplus school sites in order to retain the sportsfields on
those lands and as part of the development of that policy, staff should be very
clear that there is an interest in retaining that greenspace for that
purpose. The Director confirmed this
would be communicated as part of the evolution of the Greenspace Master Plan.
Councillor Bloess inquired why
some NCC-owned lands were screened out from this Study, particularly those
located near Highway 174. Also, he
indicated that sports groups are interested in how the City acquires some of
those lands and how much control those organizations get. Mr. Finlay indicated that the first
level of screening done in this Study looked at land-use designation in the
Official Plan and for lands within the greenbelt, the NCC Greenbelt designation
was used. As a result, a lot of those
lands were identified as being of some environmental significance in the
Greenbelt Master Plan. Staff agreed to
investigate and report back to the councillor in response to his queries.
Councillor Stavinga indicated that
the small portions of lands in Stittsville identified on the Urban Area Key Map
are no longer publicly owned.
That the Health, Recreation and Social Services Committee receive
this report and refer it to Council for information and that there be a
revised Departmental memo provided, giving greater clarity between the
connection of this Study to other initiatives, as mentioned.
CARRIED,
as amended
Note: The revisions requested have been incorporated into the original staff memo.