COMMUNITY AMENITY CONTRIBUTION POLICY
A report introducing considerations for the development of a formal Community Amenity Contribution (CAC) policy to rationalize negotiations with developers.
TOWN OF VIEW ROYAL Planning & Development Report
TO: Committee of the Whole FROM: J. Chow, Senior Planner DATE: June 8, 2018 MEETING: June 12, 2018 FILE NO: 0340-20-40 Policies – Dev. Serv.- Community Amenity Contribution Policy
COMMUNITY AMENITY CONTRIBUTION POLICY
RECOMMENDATION:
That the June 8, 2018 report from the Senior Planner titled “Community Amenity Contribution Policy” be received for information.
CHIEF ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICER’S COMMENTS: I concur with the recommendation.
DIRECTOR OF DEVELOPMENT SERVICES’ COMMENTS: I concur with the recommendation.
PURPOSE:
- To introduce the concept of a community amenity contribution policy.
- To identify considerations for the development of a community amenity contribution policy
BACKGROUND:
Following a series of major rezoning applications in the past few years, there has been Council discussion on what an appropriate level of community amenity contributions (CACs) might be when rezoning for new residential or commercial development.
To address certain impacts of new growth, the Local Government Act (LGA) already provides a variety of tools that enables local governments to require services, collect fees and/or obtain land from new development, including: Development Cost Charges, school site acquisition fees, excess capacity or extended services, park dedication from subdivision; and road dedication.
However, growth can lead to demand for additional community amenities not provided for under these legislative provisions. The rezoning process can include consideration for community amenities through density bonus zoning and CACs. Certain zones in Zoning Bylaw 900, 2014 include density bonuses in a set amount for the provision of different amenities or features such as green roofs, underground parking, green space, and streetscaping that exceeds bylaw standards. This report focuses on Community Amenity Contributions.
Community Amenity Contributions (CACs) Community Amenity Contributions are voluntary amenity contributions intended to benefit the local or greater community. They are negotiated and agreed to by the applicant/developer and the local government as part of the general consideration of a rezoning application. It should be noted that approval of a rezoning should not be based on the provision of amenities because there is no legislative authority to require them (s.462 (6) LGA). CACs can take several forms, including the provision of capital improvements, affordable housing and/or financial contributions that can accumulate to fund larger/future amenities.
There is currently one policy regarding CACs in Official Community Plan Bylaw No. 811, 2011:
Policy HS1.4 Housing Amenity Contributions Ensure that any proposed multi-unit residential development requiring a rezoning provides a “housing amenity” contribution to the Town, which could be directed to the Regional Housing Trust Fund as part of the Town’s annual contribution.
DISCUSSION:
Key issues include the following:
- Why should a community amenity policy be considered?
- Which municipalities within the CRD have CAC policies?
- Process to Develop a Community Amenity Contribution policy
- Next Steps
1. Why should a community amenity contribution policy be considered?
The rationale for CACs is that rezoning can confer value on land and that the local government should share in the ‘land lift’, which is a windfall gain to the property owner. The Town’s practice has been to negotiate community amenity contributions on an ad hoc basis, which allows Council to address the unique circumstances of each rezoning application and its location.
Some industry concerns are that CACs can add to housing cost, hampering affordability and economic development; however the cost of CACs in practice is usually minor (generally less than 1% of the sale price of multifamily units). The key benefit of a CAC policy over ad hoc negotiation would be a rationalized, systematic approach that balances affordability and community expectations. At the same time, a CAC policy would not necessarily restrict what Council may consider an appropriate amenity, but it would help to establish a framework and guidance for assessment and consideration. Additional benefits can include the following:
- A clear understanding about what types of CACs (e.g. affordable housing, transportation improvements, environment protection, park upgrades, public art etc.) are valued in the community and which are the priorities.
- Transparency and consistency between applications;
- Help to ensure that a CAC will be appropriate for the community and of benefit to the Town;
- Ensure the Town continues to be a desirable place to do business.
Table 1 summarizes the estimated value of CACs negotiated by the Town for some recent high profile rezoning applications.
Table 1. Estimated Community Amenity Contributions and Amount per Unit
| Project | Amenity | Estimated amenity value | Estimated Residential Units | Amount per Residential Unit |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Christie Point* 2861 Craigowan Road | CRD Regional Affordable Housing Trust Fund; Tenant relocation support package; Transportation improvements | $750,000; $850,000; +$850,000; Total: $2,450,000 | 473 | $5,180 |
| Thetis Lake Campground 1938 West Park Lane | 5.12 ha Mill Hill parcel | $1,078,000 Assessed value; $2,500,000 Purchase price | 350 | $3,080- $7,142 |
| Avanti townhouses 1342 Trans Canada Highway (St. Giles St.) | Park improvement contribution; 82m walkway; Road and drainage improvements | $15,000; $22,000; +$115,070; Total: 152,070 | 22 | $6,912 |
| 4 Mile Estates townhouses 235 Island Highway | Park improvement contribution | $36,000 | 24 | $1,500 |
| “Glentana apartment” 105-108 Glentana Rd | 260m trail with vehicle access and some fencing | $25,000 | 46 | $544 |
| Eagle Creek Village 33 Helmcken Road All phases Comm. / Res. | Financial contribution; Park land (assessed value); Trail including footbridge | $1,000,000; $853,000; +$207,600; Total: $2,060,600 | 33,588 m² | $61.35/m² |
* A land lift analysis was conducted for this rezoning application
These figures indicate that the Town is receiving inconsistent amenity contributions. In general, relatively more CACs per unit from larger or controversial projects. There could be several reasons why, including:
- With increased density, there is increased demand for amenities (e.g. Vancouver False Creek)
- Larger or controversial projects may have more significant community impacts and can be balanced with a higher level of CACs.
- Smaller projects have smaller margins and less in the way of economies of scale to address CACs.
See Attachment 1 for a recent example of a CAC policy from the District of Central Saanich.
2. Which municipalities within the CRD have CAC policies with target rates?
Table 2. Community Amenity Contribution Rates - CRD municipalities
| Municipality | CAC Policy? | Date | Target Rate |
|---|---|---|---|
| Central Saanich | Yes | 2017 | $7500 Per unit/lot or equivalent/m² GFA of non-residential use |
| Colwood | Yes | Pre 2013 | $2000-2500/unit plus: housing agreement for 1 in 10 units to be affordable housing or contribution (under review) |
| Esquimalt | No | ||
| Highlands | Yes | 2011 | No target rate |
| Langford | Yes | 2012 | $3500-$7000 per SFD (depending on location); $2135-$4270 MF unit (depending on location); Plus $10.75/m² Commercial in Downtown/City Centre (plus: housing agreement for 1 in 10 units to be affordable housing) |
| Metchosin | No | ||
| North Saanich | Yes | 2013 | $16,000/lot; $9,500/townhouse unit; $8,000/ apartment unit |
| Oak Bay | In process | In process | |
| Saanich | No | ||
| Sidney | Yes | 2017 | $150/m² GFA above base density |
| Sooke | No | Repealed 2017: $5000/unit ($2500/unit in Town Centre) | |
| Victoria | Yes | 2016 | $53.82/m² Urban Residential / Large Urban village; $129.17/m² Core Residential/Business (<2787m²); 75% of the land lift through economic analysis for Town Centre and rest of Core |
Observations:
- Most CAC policies relate to residential development.
- All but Victoria use a target rate rather than a land lift analysis. Using a target rate is clear and simple to administer. A land lift analysis, however, is a method that quantifies the land lift with more precision through economic analysis and may be more suitable to complex or larger scale projects that can have significant community impacts.
- Many include an amount or a percentage towards an affordable housing fund.
- The types of community amenities that are priorities for the community are usually listed in the Official Community Plan or in the policy itself.
3. Considerations for a Community Amenity Contribution policy
An effective CAC policy would include elements as outlined in Table 3.
Table 3. Considerations for a Community Amenity Contribution Policy
| Item | Description |
|---|---|
| Applicability | Residential and/or non-residential development; small vs. large applications; Town-wide or in specific locations; exemptions; OCP policy amendments may be considered |
| Consultation with stakeholders | Consultation with advisory committees and/or the wider public may help to confirm the scope and type of community amenities that desired by the community at large. Sometimes these are listed in an OCP. Consultation with the development community to help establish terms that are reasonable in comparison to other municipalities in the region. |
| Maximizing value | An effective policy would support creative means to achieve maximum value; for example a builder might be able to construct an amenity at a lower price than the Town can secure through tendering. |
| Rates/targets and methodology | Establish rates/targets methodology that are reasonable and defensible (e.g. flat-rate per units, tiered or sliding scales, or land lift analysis) and in keeping with neighbour municipalities. |
| Disbursement | A policy should include how the funds are to be utilised; specific amenities or general categories. For example, most of the municipalities allocate an amount or percentage for a (regional or local) affordable housing fund. |
| Accountability | A reserve fund for amenities expenditures could be established that would include reporting on the disbursement of funds. |
| Implementation | Timing and phasing |
| Currency | Rates and processes should be updated on a regular basis |
The Province’s “Short Guide to Community Amenity Contributions: Balancing Community Planning, Public Benefits and Housing Affordability” (Attachment 2) provides more information on CACs, and encourages an approach that is legally sound, follows good planning practices, and avoids increasing housing costs.
- Avoid legal risk and maintain public confidence (e.g. do not impose CACs and avoid perception that zoning is for sale)
- Plan ahead (e.g. identify desired types of amenities in OCP)
- Seek modest contributions and follow an approach that balances community amenities and housing affordability
- Apply Development Cost Charge (DCC) principles to CACs (i.e. amenity related to development)
- Engage the development community (to avoid contributing to significantly higher housing prices)
- Choosing an approach to obtaining amenities (set targets but be open to negotiation)
4. Next Steps
Subject to comments and direction from the Committee, staff proposes to:
- Conduct further work to draft and calibrate a Community Amenity Contribution Policy and the proposed value of Community Amenity Contributions.
- Identify policy implications, e.g. need for revising or establishing additional Official Community Plan policies.
- Identify administrative implications, i.e. consideration of a general amenity reserve fund.
- Report back to the Committee at key points for further guidance.
- Work with the Committee to establish a consultation process.
- Present findings and a draft policy and implementation plan for review by the Committee of the Whole and consideration by Council.
RECOMMENDATION:
That the June 8, 2018 report from the Senior Planner titled “Community Amenity Contribution Policy” be received for information.
SUBMITTED BY: Jeff Chow, MCIP, RPP Senior Planner
REVIEWED BY: Lindsay Chase, MCIP, RPP Director of Development Services
ATTACHMENTS
- District of Central Saanich Community Amenity Contributions Policy (3 pages)
- The Short Guide to Community Amenity Contributions: Balancing Community Planning, Public Benefits and Housing Affordability – Province of BC, March 2014 (7 pages).
Document Images
(3)
