This site is in beta — data may be incomplete and features are still being added.
Council Meeting/Documents/Staff Report: View Royal Park Community Garden Policy Amendment
Staff Report

Staff Report: View Royal Park Community Garden Policy Amendment

October 4, 2016Pages 12–1510 sections

A proposal to amend the Community Gardens Policy No. 5200-015 to grant existing plot holders right of first refusal and adjust annual fees.

8.1a) View Royal Park Community Garden Policy Amendment
Annual fees: $20 (small), $25 (medium), $30 (large)Current waitlist existsPolicy No. 5200-015September 27, 2016

TOWN OF VIEW ROYAL COUNCIL REPORT

TO: Council
DATE: September 27, 2016
FROM: Jennifer Smith, Engineering Clerk
MEETING DATE: October 4, 2016

View Royal Park Community Garden Policy Amendment

Page 12–15

RECOMMENDATION:

THAT the Community Gardens Policy #5200-015 be amended to allow plot holders the first right to use the same plot in the succeeding term;

AND THAT any existing plot holder who wishes to exchange a plot for another plot comes before the waitlist, and their former plot then be available for the first person on the waitlist;

AND FURTHER THAT the annual fee for small plots be set to $20, medium plots $25, and large plots $30.

Page 12–15

CHIEF ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICER'S COMMENTS:

I concur with the recommendation.

Page 12–15

PURPOSE OF REPORT:

To review policy upon completion of the first term.

Page 12–15

BACKGROUND:

In April 2014 The View Royal Park Community Garden was established, allocating 30 plots (13 small, 10 medium and 7 large) to participants in a lottery style draw for a three year term at a cost of $20 per year with the understanding that at the end of the term the plots would revert to a lottery style draw. The garden is currently managed by Town staff. Management includes collection of annual fees, maintaining a waitlist (currently eight on list), email inquiries and meeting with the View Royal Community Garden Society.

After receiving notice that the Craigflower Community Gardens would be closed, in June 2014 the Craigflower Community Gardeners submitted an expansion proposal for 90 additional plots to the Town for the View Royal Community Gardens. At the October 7, 2014 meeting, Council passed the following resolution “Community Gardens Policy be amended to facilitate the incorporation of the former Craigflower Community Gardens group into the View Royal Community Gardens program”.

As a result, the View Royal Park Community Garden Society (the Society) was formed and the community garden was expanded by six plots in 2015 built by the Society. Funding for the plots was awarded through View Royal grant-in-aid in the amount of $1,500. Though not to the same standard as the Town installed raised beds, the new raised beds were built to a standard of two boards high.

In 2016 the Society received a $1,000 grant-in-aid from the Town, and have continued the expansion by an additional 10 plots - seven beds to be allocated to the waitlist, two community beds and one for a future student program. (Map – Attachment A)

Page 12–15

PROJECT INFORMATION:

As we approach the end of the first three year term in the View Royal Park Community Garden a questionnaire was sent to the plot holders to provide feedback on their experience. The gardeners were advised that those who did not respond would be considered in favour of maintaining the existing policy. The Town received 20 of 36 responses (Questionnaire Summary - Attachment B).

  1. Plots
    Most of the respondents (17/20) were satisfied or extremely happy with their garden plots, and appreciative for the opportunity to garden. Those on the upper slope, however, did have concerns with drainage.

  2. Term
    The questionnaire offered two options with regards to the term - retain existing lottery format, or amend to a right of first refusal system.

The majority of respondents (17/20) were in favour of amending policy to allow an extended term in the same plot as they have invested money and time and would like to see a return on their investment.

Removal of the term expiry would provide existing gardeners the confidence that they could reap the benefits of their investment in soil improvements, perennial plantings, individual fencing, etc.; however it would also mean that those on the waitlist would not be provided a certainty of receiving a plot as they would only become available by attrition or expansion. An additional list would also be required for those existing gardeners wishing for a different plot (larger, different location, etc).

  1. Damage
    Only ten gardeners reported minor damage had occurred to their plots.

  2. Expansion
    The questionnaire included a two-part question on future expansion of the community garden – are the gardeners in favour of additional expansion through fundraising efforts; and if so, would they be willing to participate.

While the majority of respondents were in favour of expansion, there was mixed feelings on how that would be paid for. There were 11 in favour of expansion through fundraising, though only nine of those would participate in building the expansion plots. There were seven respondents that favoured expansion completed by the Town.

  1. Management
    The questionnaire asked gardeners to consider if they would be in favour of a self-managed community garden in partnership with the Town, run by a group of volunteers such as the Society; and if not, would they be in favour of two separately managed gardens – the original 30 managed by the Town, and the expansion plots managed by the Society.

Of the responses, eight were in favour of self-management and eight felt the Town should continue to manage the garden. It should be noted that the Society currently has eight members registered in the View Royal Community Gardens.

Page 12–15

BUDGET IMPLICATIONS:

To provide consistency in the garden and equity to all gardeners an annual fee amendment as follows:

Bed Size Annual Fee
Small beds (30 sq.ft.) $20 per year
Medium beds (40sq.ft.) $25 per year
Large beds including expansion (50+ sq.ft.) $30 per year

The increased funds would be allocated to a community garden expansion account, resulting in approximately $220 per year, allowing the Town to add one bed per year if demand requires.

Page 12–15

POLICY IMPLICATIONS:

The Community Garden Policy would require amendments to Fees, Term & Renewal (Current Policy - Attachment C).

Page 12–15

ALTERNATIVES TO STAFF RECOMMENDATION:

  1. That Council accepts the Society proposal to manage the View Royal Park Community Garden as proposed in Attachment D.

The Society has shown an interest in expanding the garden, ultimately to include up to 90 plots, through fundraising, events and grant applications. To date the majority of funding has come through Town grant-in-aid in both 2015 and 2016, supplemented by community events, compost sales and the Thrifty’s Smile Card fundraising program. Funding hasn’t been sufficient enough to provide beds to the level of quality initially installed by the Town. (Society Progress Report – Attachment E)

The Society has indicated an interest in assuming management of the entire community garden which they feel would promote grassroots community building and a passion for gardening with a vision of picnics, seed exchanges, community events, etc.

  1. That the garden be separated into two sections; the original 30 plots managed by the Town, and the expansion plots managed by the Society including 16 currently built, plus any future expansion; or

  2. That no changes be made to the community garden policy.

Page 12–15

RECOMMENDATION:

THAT the Community Gardens Policy #5200-015 be amended to allow plot holders the first right to use the same plot in the succeeding term;

AND THAT any existing plot holder who wishes to exchange a plot for another plot comes before the waitlist, and their former plot then be available for the first person on the waitlist;

AND FURTHER THAT the annual fee for small plots be set to $20, medium plots $25, and large plots $30.

SUBMITTED BY: Jennifer Smith, Engineering Clerk
REVIEWED BY: John Rosenberg, Director of Engineering

Page 12–15

Document Images

(4)
Document image
Document image
Document image
Document image
Extracted from: 2016 10 04 Council Agenda - Pdf