8. disposal STRATEGY - 9 Leeming Drive – former St. Thomas School

STRATÉGIE D’ÉLIMINATION – 9, promenade LEEMING, ancienne école ST. THOMAS

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

That Council:

1. Approve the staff recommendation to retain a small portion of the property at 9 Leeming Drive, shown as Parcel A on Document 2 attached and having an area of approximately 0.124 ha (0.306 acres) to increase the size of Maki Park to allow for future park development;

2. Declare the remainder of the property at 9 Leeming Drive, being Parcels B and C on Document 2 attached as surplus to the City’s needs;

3. Approve the staff recommendation to market the remainder of the property at 9 Leeming Drive for sale being Parcels B and C on Document 2 attached and having an area of approximately 1.00 ha (2.47 acres) and legally described as part Block E, Registered Plan 442519 to recoup a portion of the $2M expenditure; and

4. Approve the transfer of the property described in Recommendation 3 to the Ottawa Community Lands Development Corporation (OCLDC) to initiate the sale and redevelopment of this property as described in this report.

RECOMMANDATIONS DU COMITÉ

Que le Conseil :

1. approuve la recommandation du personnel de conserver une petite partie de la propriété située au 9, promenade Leeming, constituée de la parcelle A dans le document 2 ci-joint et ayant une superficie d'environ 0,306 acre (0,124 ha), afin d'accroître les dimensions du parc Maki en prévision de son aménagement futur;

2. déclare excédentaire aux besoins de la Ville le reste de la propriété située au 9, promenade Leeming, constitué des parcelles B et C dans le document 2 ci-joint,

3. approuve la recommandation du personnel de mettre en vente le reste de la propriété située au 9, promenade Leeming, constitué des parcelles B et C dans le document 2 ci-joint, ayant une superficie d'environ 2,47 acres (1,00 ha) et décrit officiellement comme partie de la pièce E dans le plan enregistré 442519, afin de recouvrer une partie de la dépense de 2 millions de dollars; et

4. approuve la cession de la propriété visée par la recommandation 3 ci-dessus à la Société d'aménagement des terrains communautaires d'Ottawa en vue de sa vente et de son réaménagement, conformément à ce qui est prévu dans le présent rapport.

DOCUMENTATION

1. City Manager, Planning and Infrastructure report dated 24 April 2012 (ACS2012-PAI-REP-0012).

2. Extract of Finance and Economic Development Committee Minutes dated 1 May 2012.

Report to/Rapport au :

Finance and Economic Development Committee

Comité des finances et du développement économique

and Council / et au Conseil

April 24, 2012

le 24 avril 2012

Submitted by/Soumis par : Nancy Schepers, Deputy City Manager/Directrice municipale adjointe, Planning and Infrastructure / Urbanisme et Infrastructure

Contact Person / Personne ressource: Peter Radke, Manager, Realty Initiatives and Development Branch, Real Estate Partnerships and Development Office/gestionnaire, initiatives stratégiques en immobilier, Bureau des partenaires immobiliers et du développement

(613)580-2424 x 12551, Peter.Radke@ottawa.ca

BAY/BAIE (7)

Ref N°: ACS2012-PAI-REP-0012

SUBJECT:

disposal STRATEGY - 9 Leeming Drive – former

St. Thomas School

OBJET :

STRATÉGIE D’ÉLIMINATION – 9, promenade LEEMING, ancienne école ST. THOMAS

REPORT RECOMMENDATIONS

That the Finance and Economic Development Committee recommend Council:

2. Declare the remainder of the property at 9 Leeming Drive, being Parcels B and C on Document 2 attached as surplus to the City’s needs;

RecommandationS du rapport

Que le Comité des finances et du développement économique recommande au Conseil :

1. d'approuver la recommandation du personnel de conserver une petite partie de la propriété située au 9, promenade Leeming, constituée de la parcelle A dans le document 2 ci-joint et ayant une superficie d'environ 0,306 acre (0,124 ha), afin d'accroître les dimensions du parc Maki en prévision de son aménagement futur;

2. de déclarer excédentaire aux besoins de la Ville le reste de la propriété située au 9, promenade Leeming, constitué des parcelles B et C dans le document 2 ci-joint,

3. d'approuver la recommandation du personnel de mettre en vente le reste de la propriété située au 9, promenade Leeming, constitué des parcelles B et C dans le document 2 ci-joint, ayant une superficie d'environ 2,47 acres (1,00 ha) et décrit officiellement comme partie de la pièce E dans le plan enregistré 442519, afin de recouvrer une partie de la dépense de 2 millions de dollars; et

4. d'approuver la cession de la propriété visée par la recommandation 3 ci-dessus à la Société d'aménagement des terrains communautaires d'Ottawa en vue de sa vente et de son réaménagement, conformément à ce qui est prévu dans le présent rapport.

Background

The subject property abuts the north side of Maki Park as outlined on Document 1 and has a site area of approximately 1.12 ha (2.78 acres). The property is zoned Minor Institutional and is improved with a one-storey school building, constructed in 1962 with a total building area of approximately 2,403 sq.m. (25,875 sq.ft.) including a gymnasium addition built in the mid-1960s. The school gymnasium was used by community groups (e.g. Scouts) from the mid-1960s until June 2006 when this arrangement was apparently terminated by the Ottawa Catholic District School Board.

On 9 December 2009, Council considered a report (Ref. # ACS2009-CMR-REP-0055) regarding the potential purchase of this property. The report indicated that the Crystal Beach/Lakeview Community Association (CBLCA) had requested that the City purchase this property for re-use as a shared-used community centre and that the Ward Councillor supported this acquisition request.

The report also noted that:

· the existing recreation facilities at Maki Park includes a soccer field, a baseball diamond, a children’s play area and structure, an outdoor hockey rink and a one-storey community building known as Maki House with a ground floor area of 379 sq.m. (4,085 sq. ft.) for community activities and a partial basement with a floor area of approximately 139.35 sq.m. (1,500 sq.) ft. used mainly as storage;

· Parks, Recreation and Culture staff could not support the acquisition of St. Thomas School within currently funded programs given the large capital investment (purchase price, major repairs and lifecycle replacement that would be needed to operate the property as a City-owned community facility); and

· Parks, Recreation and Culture staff would strongly support squaring off of the southern property line, increasing the available land for future expansion of Maki House (additional programming rooms and/or gym) without having to lose, or adversely affect, the existing sports fields.

Based on an analysis of options presented, Council then directed staff as follows:

1. To pursue negotiations with the Ottawa Catholic School Board for the City to acquire the St. Thomas School site at 9 Leeming Drive;

2. To consult with the Ward Councillor and the community on the future uses of the school on the condition of funding this acquisition and/or all related net renovation, demolition or construction costs through a Special Services Levy;

3. To report to the Corporate Services and Economic Development Committee on the status of the negotiations for acquiring the site and the funding sources for this acquisition.

Staff met with Councillor Cullen on 12 February 2010, to establish a community consultation process on the future uses of the school and the related condition set out by Council that the property acquisition and/or all related net renovation, demolition or construction costs be funded through a Special Services Levy. It was agreed that the community consultation process would also include feedback on the process for development planning, and for the eventual sale of the residual lands.

On 12 May 2010, Council approved report (Ref. # ACS2010-CMR-REP-0014) and directed staff as follows:

Staff be authorized to complete the acquisition of the former St. Thomas School property, located at 9 Leeming Drive and legally described as Block E Registered Plan 442519 as shown on Document 1 from the Ottawa Catholic District School Board, based on the Acquisition Agreement and utilizing debt financing, in the approximate amount of $2,000,000, as described in this report;

Staff be directed to consult further with the community on the future uses of the subject property, as described in this report, based on reaching a community consensus that a Special Services Levy will be implemented for the City to recover its acquisition costs and/or all related net renovation, demolition or construction costs related to the proposed community uses, and report back to Council by March 2011;

In the event that a community consensus is not reached by February 2011 on funding a community-use option for the property through a Special Services Levy, staff be directed to report back to Council by March 2011 with recommendations regarding the disposal and sale of all or part of the subject property.

In response to the Council direction, the Realty Services Branch acquired the property on 31 August 2010 for a purchase price of $1,730,750. The purchase price was based on the most probable highest and best use of the property if exposed to the open market. The total cost of the acquisition was approximately $2,000,000 including the purchase price, GST, Land Transfer Tax and one (1) year’s operating cost for a vacant facility.

DISCUSSION

In accordance with recommendation 3 of the 2010 staff report (Ref. # ACS2010-CMR-REP-0014) noted above, three (3) options outlined in the report were examined by staff and cost estimates were prepared with the assistance of staff from Parks and Recreation, Design and Construction and Finance, to determine the lot levy, based on 1,490 households as of 2010.

The analysis resulted in the following:

Option 1

Retain and retrofit entire building of 2,403 sq.m. (25,875 sq. ft.)

Full Capital Cost: $4,296,000

Average Cost of Levy: $374 per year for 10 years

Cost to City: $258,750 per year (Operating cost at $10/sq. ft. per year)

$54,596 per year (Life Cycle cost at $2.11/sq. ft. per year)

Total Cost to City: $313,346 per year

Option 2

Retain Parcel A and B – demolish larger portion of building and retain and contemporise

731.58 sq.m. (7,875 sq.ft) . (Gym and 2 classrooms), sell Parcel C

Full Capital Cost: $3,854,000

Average Cost of Levy: $335 per year for 10 years

Cost to City: $78,750 (Operating cost at $10/sq. ft. per year)

$16,616 (Life Cycle cost $2.11/sq. ft. per year)

Total Cost to City: $95,366 per year

Option 3

Sell Parcel B and C, retain Parcel A for future park development - No Levy

Average Cost of Levy: $0

Cost to City: $220,143 to retain land

In the fall of 2010, Councillor Mark Taylor was elected as the new ward councillor. Staff met with Councillor Taylor in June 2011 to discuss the next steps to move forward with the Council direction. The Councillor chaired a meeting on 23 June 2011 to present the three (3) options outlined above. This meeting was attended by members of the Community Association, representatives of the Great Rivers School (possible tenants), staff from Parks, Recreation and Cultural Services Department and from Real Estate Partnerships and Development Office. During that meeting, the Community Association representatives indicated that the proposed levy for options one (1) and two (2) was too high and would most likely not garner the necessary support needed from the community. Instead, the Community Association requested additional time to analyse the details supporting the cost of the levy and investigate other options. Councillor Taylor offered to review any new alternative acquisition proposals to be submitted to his office by the end of August 2011 with a view to determining whether he could present the proposal at Council when the staff report came forward.

On 27 October 2011, the Community Association held a public meeting, which was attended by the Councillor’s office, to present its alternative option for the site to the community. The alternative option proposed no property tax levy, and renovations were proposed to be funded with annual membership fees or profits from programs, including fundraising by the community and contributions from the City Councillor. If these funding options did not materialize, the Community Association proposed the City retain the property, demolish the building and leave it vacant until there was a demonstrated need in the community for a recreation centre.

A meeting was held on 12 January 2012 with members of the Crystal Beach/Lakeview Community Association (CBLCA), Councillor Taylor, staff from Parks, Recreation and Cultural Services Department and from Real Estate Partnerships and Development Office. The Community Association presented two (2) new options and agreed to provide additional details to City staff so they could examine the options in preparation for a public meeting held on 21 February 2012.

A Public Meeting, organized by City Staff was held on 21 February 2012. A presentation was made by City staff outlining the three (3) options from the 2010 staff report. As per Council approval, two (2) of those options involved a lot levy and the third option involved retaining a small parcel (Parcel A in Document 2) for expansion of the existing Maki Park. There were questions relating to multi unit rental properties and whether they are required to pay their fair share of the levy. After further investigation, finance staff advised that in accordance with Section 326 of the Municipal Act, the levy collected under the Special Area Zone and Special Area Tax Rate is applied to each property owner and the amount of the levy per property is based on the individual property assessment. Therefore, the levy for a multi-unit rental property would be considerably more than for the average single household. The Community Association also made a presentation showing other options, however, none involved a lot levy for consideration. These options are described in the Consultation section of this report. Following the presentations, at the request of Councillor Taylor, attendees were asked, by way of a show of hands, to indicate if they supported the lot levy. It was clearly apparent there is no interest in the lot levy option for acquiring the lands. The comments from the residents that were gathered at the meeting are summarized in the Consultation section of this report.

Recommended Action

Given the results from the consultation sessions held with the Crystal Beach Lakeview Community Association and the community at large, there clearly is no support for the lot levy option of acquiring the former St. Thomas property and its development as a community facility. Although there appears to be community interest in retaining the property for community use, the renovation, operating and life cycle costs are substantial and there is no funding source to support this initiative. It is noted that Maki House does not fully fulfill the community needs for indoor recreational space, however, the area is not listed as a priority for indoor community space in the Parks, Recreation and Cultural Services Department’s Infrastructure Strategy.

Therefore in accordance with Council direction, and as per Recommendation 1 in this report, staff is recommending that Parcel A (See Document 2 attached) be retained for future Maki Park expansion and as per Recommendation 3, that the remainder of the property be sold (Parcels B and C in Document 2) to recoup as much of the City’s investment as possible.

Staff is also recommending that the property be declared surplus to the City needs and transferred to the Ottawa Community Lands Development Corporation (OCLDC), under Recommendations 2 and 4 respectively. The OCLDC will facilitate development of a strategy for the sale and redevelopment of the property subject to development conditions to ensure the future use of the site is compatible with the neighbourhood.

RURAL IMPLICATIONS

There are no rural implications to implementing the recommendations in this report.

CONSULTATION

As set out in this report, staff has consulted with the Ward Councillor, the Crystal Beach/Lakeview Community Association (CBLCA) and the community on the options for acquiring the property. At the community meeting held on 21 February 2012 at the Nepean Sailing Club, after introductions by Councillor Mark Taylor and Josée Helie from Parks, Recreational and Cultural Services, a presentation was made by Dhaneshwar Neermul of the Real Estate Partnerships and Development Office (REPDO) on the background and options under consideration. The CBLCA, represented by Ruth and Michael Tremblay, made a presentation which is summarized below. An exchange of Q & A’s then followed which is summarized below after the CBLCA presentation.

Summary of CBLCA Presentation:

Recommend the City use a Two Phase approach to sale of land:

· Phase One involves:

o selling a reconfigured parcel “C”, measuring 0.6 ha (1.5 ac.), which could potentially generate more than 50% of initial cost to acquire the property

o Rezone parcel “C” to an R2 type zoning to maximize land value and recover costs.

o Keep existing gym and purchaser of Parcel C to pay for demolition and reinstatement of end wall of gym

· Phase Two involves:

o the City continuing to work with the community towards providing for indoor recreation centre and provide a Class B estimate for gym renovations

o It is felt that the City generated numbers for renovations/addition to existing gym (Class D estimate: $1M for gym renovations and $700,000 for 2 new classroom addition on the south side of gym) are too high and approximately 40% higher than can be delivered.

Possible outcomes once 1.5 acre Parcel “C” is sold:

§ City renovate gym and lease it to CBLCA, revenues generated from memberships, rentals, service providers and user fees OR

§ A not-for-profit corporation could be formed, by interested community members or the CBLCA to purchase the property and renovate the gym to Building Code standards. Numerous grants are available for such community projects OR

§ City tenders the sale of the property to a private sector operator who then provides recreation services (YMCA or similar operators) OR

§ Demolish the gym and leave the land vacant until a new LEED silver standard recreation centre can be built by the City

Summary of Residents comments:

The CBLCA is not a pulse in the community; they did not consult door to door. I live beside the school, it was never fully used (scouts were the only ones), no support for keeping St Thomas school.
This is a want not a need, I do not support the CBLCA proposal, Maki house is noisy enough, would not want additional noise on the street, the school is an eyesore and should be sold for residential development, I would rather have improved bus service.
I do not support levy, I support keeping Parcel A.
I am a resident of Bayshore Park, and only support if user-paid not through levy
Is Maki house not sufficient for community needs?
Can zoning and building size for a new development be guaranteed?
Don’t want to lose all our greenspace.
Can the levy payback period be increased for example 15 to 20 years
Loss of Sir John A Macdonald and St. Thomas schools, community wants to keep what they have.
Land was given to school board for free and they are now selling at market value.
No other community has been asked to pay a levy
I attended several meetings and will not pay a levy; I suggest City sells property and negotiate for the developer to provide some kind of gym or fitness facility.
User fees, if voluntary, recouping investment may not be possible
I prefer options from the Community association with no levy, there are few facilities for kids in area, park space also rare, keeping upgraded gym and most of land seems logical with lease to private group like YMCA.
Amalgamation did not consider outside Nepean (Pinecrest expanded to serve west end).
Council option to keep Parcel A too small.
Would there be support to sell enlarged parcel C and retain A and B?
Not prepared to go to Council yet, need community consensus on what people want.
Community has to plan for future larger demographics.
What about Minto, are they exempt, landlord should pay the levy too.

· Propose the City issue a broad solicitation for proposals, inviting innovative approaches to generate revenue by offering: naming rights for new facility, free recycling of school building materials, approach Habitat for Humanity and other recyclers, free demolition by interest groups like the Canadian Forces for training purposes, a design competition offered by the School of Architecture at Carleton University and a design build opportunity to Algonquin College/s new Building Trades centre.

Comments by the Ward Councillor(s)

This issue has been one that begun several years ago and has persisted to today. During the community consultation meetings and during the interaction with the local community association, while there is general support for the notion of adding resource/activity space to the Maki Park area, there is slim to no desire on the part of residents to pay a levy for such a resource. As a result, I am in support of the staff suggested option which provides a small addition of land to the park to facilitate a future development, which I would support through the normal city budget process. The excess land, if sold on the open market through the Ottawa Community Lands Development arm, should be guided in their development to ensure there is a suitable fit for the community.

LEGAL IMPLICATIONS

There are no legal impediments to implementing the recommendation in this report.

RISK MANAGEMENT IMPLICATIONS

There are no risk management impediments to implementing the Recommendations arising from this report.

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS

Proceeds generated from the sale of parcels B and C by the Ottawa Community Lands Development Corporation will be transferred back to the City upon completion of the sale.

ACCESSIBILITY IMPACTS

There are no accessibility impacts associated with the recommendations in this report.

Environmental Implications

There are no environmental implications to implementing the recommendations in this report.

Technology Implications

There are no technical implications to implementing the recommendations in this report.

TERm of council priorities

The recommendations of this report support City Council’s strategic priorities: Healthy and Caring Communities (HC) and its objective HC2 to improve parks and recreation; and Financial Responsibility (FS) and its objective FS2 to maintain and enhance the City’s financial position.

SUPPORTING DOCUMENTATION

Document 1 - Sketch of the property

Document 2 - Sketch of the property showing Parcels ‘A’, ‘B’ and ‘C’

DISPOSITION

Following Council’s approval Real Estate Partnerships and Development Office will market Parcels B and C for sale and retain Parcel A for future development in Maki Park.

DOCUMENT 1

DOCUMENT 2