Loading...
2017-11-07 Growth Committee Agenda Packet - Open SessionCity of Saint John Growth Committee - Open Session AGENDA Tuesday, November 7, 2017 12:00 pm 8th Floor Boardroom, City Hall Pages 1. Call to Order 1.1 Introduction of New Enterprise Saint John CEO 1.1.1 Labour Market Report - Enterprise Saint John 1.1.2 Talent Recruitment Update 1 -7 1.2 Enhanced Community Standards Program 8-23 1.3 Real Estate Year -End Projections 24-25 1.4 Urban Development Incentive Program Year -End 26-30 1.5 Growth Reserve 2017 Budget Actuals 31-31 1.6 Request for Funding - Sign Policy 32-35 1.7 Population Growth Framework 36-54 1 Poeta Sy:1 City of Saint John Growth Committee Meeting Tuesday, November 7, 2017 Growth Committee Closed Session 1. Call to Order Si vous avez besoin des services en fran�ais pour une r6union de Conseil communal, veuillez contacter le bureau du greffier communal au 658-2862. Each of the following items, either in whole or in part, is able to be discussed in private pursuant to the provisions of subsection 10.(2)(4) of the Municipalities Act and Council / Committee will make a decision(s) in that respect in Open Session: 11:00 a.m., 8th Floor Boardroom, City Hall 1.1 Financial Matter 10.2(4)(c) 1.2 Personal Matter 10.2(4)(b) 1.3 Financial Matter 10.2(4)(c) 1.4 Land Matter 10.2(4)(4) K 500JI 9 gid:H., .ter: CL Z ", 0 CT V L V 0 V A l W W O O L bD •� •E N E ClA O '5 — > .E U O E Z 0 .� w H t' '� ca m O � • W o a� 0 LL W W �_ }' bD 0 0 C: •� o W `� L Q •� CF— 0 O 0 4- ca QJ O O J 0 U O Q-0 U w a- cL/) CL 0 c 00 N9r- •U 0 '1 N Q O E Q O cn •0 •O Q .N O O 1 O .a = N -0 O _r_ N to E cn O N : N Q N C: N O O O O -0 W cn N X O Z E N a 0cn 5 > 0 o Co cn C� •— 4 a) Z •� QCL> E m a o � Co o U U O U +r N � O N Ocn N Co cn CL 0 c O i L O E 0 O cn N N O 2-1 W cm Q cn � U N O O U- cnD Q � H c � O co cn Q 'V U O n Q N O E O U O N : c cn J c: W N n N O O N 4 `~ � C:O O cn Co cn 4-0 Q cn Co �E U CoQ Z W 2 W 0 Q 0 W LL 0 U) LUJ -1--a m Q .2— ^ U (n ca -t W C:m4-0 ca O -0 (D N � C/) c E cn Co IR Q n cn 0 cm C: 0 O Z 75 E I m � Co CoU O ' m — m � � O +-� � Co. > co iii F U U ca co cn (D }, C:O _ Q L N4-0 Q E . � N O 0-0 N •2 O O Co4-0 �4-0 cn U CL � EM Co 0 O U 3 W N O }, (a C O N Q O CM O O '�WQU I UU ��WU � W � D W W U) F - z LU 5. LU -i LU F- LU 0 0 5. F- LU w 0 LL F 0 z CL E 0 U El +,arc) U N � N O E cn CL ' C O O U CL C: N .C: cn N � .C: � U m N Q O U O E U O U O Q Q _ (a C _O (a O NC:> O N n }' � O U o E 'E ca CL N Q � C N C p+r N � O > O U }, 4-0 U N OQ4-0 4-0 _O J cn J O +r W N W �, o ~U) ca 'o O U O O N Xm > p- o Z W 0 . En t ator woo« z +07 IIS t uj Fw "I f 0 0 cc fa i !, j CL (77 CL U �i j� wwwiiwt Mwwwl',: /�/ a--+ � U Ca N •— O N N Ca E U a� E ca mum U ca a- � O O L-CLbn C: u ca N 0ro — Ln Ln ot Ln � Q Q a--+ E U LCI: Q U .� L C�0 �w w O C: O ccn_" O O Qa �• — • — Ca C: E: O i E �Eo �o� `ice �v �� �'� N Cp 0 0 N Q 0 N +j }+ 0 � Q 0 00-0 � cn � W U +-+ a� a� Q +� Ln U M Ln 0 C: � U i N C: Q _� E U u U •— L •— 0 •=3 bA 0 c a--+ a--+ O � � U ' � ca � C: O ' C C: co — 0 bA 0 O -0 0 +-+ e V U •� O O -C 0 N � ca ca Uu O Q U C: cn C: a -J • — �.' C: • � •� _O N =3 0 0 >' a--+ =3 O O N� E o O v g 0 0 to MO 4-J � a--+ U O ca N �' E c: = � O E +-+ C — 0 c �l c O wvrrrraumammw/y7P prrv'r �wb V obi w O -� Q .V O •� � O z CL�, i O CL m p CL ca o (3) CL C: •— C: a� V v 'C: O a.., O +� i O �•— CL CL EE +� p p O Q 0 LL C - u 440 9 C: O NE ON O .— N +� C: O ca O � Ln 'U � O C:N +-' N C O ON .v U t�0 O E •_ O > iJ N O O ccca� Q G N U - N 9 :02 O -1-jN U � M O L � U � O •� O 0 •O � O Ln Ln ._ E i O O C: > U Ln C: Ln Ln N C: C: N C: C ca � i N O Q UN 4- 0 CL O � N N M O E C: Ca UN 0-0 CU " C O 4- wca O •_ O L Ca � � • t�A ca `n +� C: Z 0 0 0 0 lD N Rt M Rt Rt r -I N I*_ O N 00 00 r -I Ol Ol lD Rt Lfi r -I Lfi Rt i 4-J N N N 0 Lh W Lr) r14 Rt � O � Illl�uu uiuiiiil 1 _0 >- N 41 41 41 Q L L � O cin U U ca C N N N 4 cn Tf N N 0O U O O O N N Z oc U Z Z 0 � O � U _0 >- N m � Q � O cin U U ca N U O 4 cn Tf N N U Q O O N Z oc (Y) N GROWTH COMMITTEE REPORT M&C No. # fol'tild cm sharelpoil t Report Date September 26, 2017 Meeting Date October 04, 2017 Service Area Growth and Community Development Services His Worship Mayor Don Darling and Members of the Growth Committee SUBJECT: Sales Activity and Projections 2017 OPEN OR CLOSED SESSION This matter is to be discussed in open session of Common Council. AUTHORIZATION Primary Author Commissioner/Dept. HeadL4 City Manager Brian irving Kevin Fudge m I Jeff Trail RECOMMENDATION Receive and file. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Real Estate Services was asked to prepare an update regarding real estate sales activity for the 2017 operating year and the associated immediate and longer term projected tax implications for the Growth Committee's review. Twelve properties were transferred (or will be transferred) in 2017; many of them accompanied by a meaningful sales receipt and a reduction in annual property tax burden to the City. These sales totaled slightly less than $290,000 and the combined annual tax deference and tax receipts total slightly more than $16,000 per annum. Improvements upon these real estate assets which transacted could result in an additional $180,000 in annual tax base to the City. PREVIOUS RESOLUTION N/A STRATEGIC ALIGNMENT Ongoing tax base growth is an important contributor to the City's desire to become sustainable and achieving growth and prosperity. REPORT 0&1 -2 - Real Estate Services was asked to prepare an update regarding real estate sales activity for the 2017 operating year and the associated immediate and longer term projected tax implications for the Growth Committee's review. Twelve properties were transferred (or will be transferred) in 2017; many of them accompanied by a meaningful sales receipt and a reduction in annual property tax burden to the City. These sales totaled slightly less than $290,000 and the combined annual tax deference and tax receipts total slightly more than $16,000 per annum. Improvements upon these real estate assets which transacted are projected to result in an additional $180,000 in annual tax base to the City. Looking toward 2018 there are several properties currently under negotiation which would result in sales and tax impacts that would surpass the 2017 results. SERVICE AND FINANCIAL OUTCOMES The sale of City owned assets results in sales proceeds complimented by new tax revenues and cost aversion. The further investment and improvements upon these lands results in additional tax proceeds to the City. There are no impacts to servicing from the 2017 sales save and except the minor uptake of water and sewer service capacity in their respective neighborhoods. INPUT FROM OTHER SERVICE AREAS AND STAKEHOLDERS N/A ATTACHMENTS N/A OR COUNCIL REPORT Report Date October 31, 2017 Meeting Date November 07, 2017 Service Area Growth and Community Development Services His Worship Mayor Don Darling and Members of the Growth Committee SUBJECT: Development Incentives Program Update OPEN OR CLOSED SESSION This matter is to be discussed in open session of the Growth Committee. AUTHORIZATION Primary Author Commissioner/Dept. Head City Manager Jeffrey Cyr Phil Ouellette/Jacqueline Hamilton Jeff Trail RECOMMENDATION That the Growth Committee receive and file this report. Report Background In early 2016 Common Council adopted the Urban Development Incentives Program Policy with the goal of leveraging new private sector investment within the Central Peninsula. The Urban Development Incentives program is designed to provide financial support to development or redevelopment projects and to reduce financial barriers and limit the risk associated with investment. It is comprised of three specific programs: • Infill Development; • Upper Floors Redevelopment; and • Vacant Building Redevelopment. In addition to the Urban Development Incentives Program, the Beautification Grant Program was adopted as a small complementary program to enhance the curb appeal of properties in areas 41.1 outside of heritage district in the South End and Waterloo Village neighbourhoods. The intent of this program was to stabilize neighbourhoods experiencing disinvestment with the goal preparing these core residential neighbourhoods for future growth. To date, the suite of incentive programs has leveraged between $5.5 million — $7 million in construction activity through projects approved in 2016 and upcoming 2017 projects (staff are still awaiting additional information from to confirm final construction costs for 2016 projects and cost estimates for 2017 projects). Urban Development Incentives Program Uptake Overall uptake in the Urban Development Incentives program was initially high with the budget being accounted for within the first week of the program in 2016. In 2017, uptake levels declined as several projects experienced funding shortfalls, financing issues or developers were unable to bring forward projects in time for this year. It is anticipated that this could result in the high levels of program uptake in 2018; with the potential of several larger projects coming forward with applications should the program continue for the third year of the pilot. This is consistent with feedback from other municipalities, which have indicated that programs with a fixed time period typically experience the highest yield in the final year of the program. 2016 In the first year of the program, five development projects moved forward, while on additional project (St. Vincent's Apartments) experienced funding shortfalls which resulted in the project not moving forward and the termination of their grant agreement (which the applicant was supportive of). The total construction value of projects moving forward in 2016 was roughly $3 million, which will yield 17 new residential units, 10,000 square feet of new commercial in the Uptown core and total net revenue of $577,850 over the next ten years. Two projects have already obtained full or conditional occupancy, with the remaining three anticipated to be completed in early 2018. WA Total Grants Anticipated Net Residential Commercial Development Grant Awarded Over 5 Revenue Over 10 Years 10 Year ROI Units Space Project Type Years (Tax & Permits) Created Created 116 Prince William Upper $99'786 $149,850 1.50 3 Z 4,950 ft Floors Street* 302-306 Prince William Infill $28,443 $151,800 5.34 3 N/A Street 93-99 Germain Upper $91,049 $186,500 2.05 8 Z 5,100 ft Street* Floors 135-139 Upper $14,404 $42,500 2.95 1 450 ftZ Union Street Floors WA 82 Germain Upper $27.366 $47,200 1.72 2 0 Street Floors Grants Grant Awarded Over Units Created Space Created Total $233,761 $577,850 2.47 17 10,500 ft' 2017 In 2017, uptake levels were slightly down and the development projects that will proceed were unable to submit applications until only recently this fall. Therefore, two projects still require approval from common council before a grant agreement can be executed. There were two projects that were unable to move forward, which included St. Vincent's Apartments (which is currently in breach of their grant agreement), and a second vacant building project on Union Street which fell through due to financing issues (lending institutions are often risk averse and may not finance the redevelopment of long standing vacant buildings). The projects that will move forward will yield between $1.5 — $2 million in reinvestment in the Central Peninsula and 32 new residential units. Details on new revenue generated by these projects has still yet to be confirmed. Development One Time Multi -Year Total GrantsResidential Commercial Project Grant Type Grants Grant Awarded Over Units Created Space Created 5 Years 116 Coburg Vacant Building $3,269 $2,794 $6,063 3 N/A Street* Redevelopment 161.163 Infill Germain $'17,129 $14,963 $32,051 4 N/A, Street Streets Development 28 King Upper Floors Street* Redevelopment TBD TBD TBD 25 TBD * Applications have been submitted and require Common Council approval. Beautification Grant Program Uptake Despite a slow start to the Beautification Program in early 2016, the program has become highly popular following a mail out marketing campaign in late summer of 2016, and in early spring of 2017. The program has yielded a high volume of smaller projects which enhance the curb appeal of properties in disinvested areas of the South End and Waterloo Village. If the program is continued for the final year of the three year pilot program, it is anticipated that strong uptake levels will continue. 2016 (•K:3 In the first year, 17 grants worth roughly $50,000 were approved, representing $175,000 in private sector reinvestment in building facades and landscaping improvements in these neighbourhoods. Late uptake in the program resulted in a small number of projects falling through due to contractor availability and cold weather, with slightly under $40,000 being spent. This leveraged roughly $2.50 of private spending per $1.00 in grants provided by the City. 2017 In 2017, the Beautification Grant Program experienced strong uptake with the $50,000 budget fully committed by mid -summer. With additional funding provided through the Growth Committee's Growth Reserve Fund, the program has been able to leverage 26 facade improvement projects, worth $69,000 in grant funding and $196,000 in reinvestment in building facades in the South End and Waterloo Village. Clustered Impact Since the adoption of both the Urban Development Incentives and Beautification Programs in 2016, several positive reinvestment trends have been identified in significantly disinvested areas of the target neighbourhoods, particularly in the South End. This includes several transformative applications on Duke Street, St. James Street, Union Street, and Queen Street. Continued reinvestment in disinvested areas of the Central Peninsula should help to enhance these neighbourhoods appeal as a community of choice. Significant investment was also made in the commercial core of the Uptown including two projects on Germain Street and two additional projects on Prince William Street. Some of these projects are already occupied and have contributed to the enhanced vibrancy of the Uptown core. Continued growth through mixed use residential development in the Uptown core will further enhance Saint John as a desirable community to live, work and play, and contribute to Council's priority of growth and prosperity. Financial Performance In the first year of operations of the Urban Development Incentives Program, the multi -tiered grant funding system has demonstrated strong financial performance. For the first five projects, it is anticipated that all grants owing will be recovered by new revenue from building permits and taxes within three to four years. The return on investment from incentivized projects is estimated to be roughly 2.5 -to -1 evaluated over 10 years (and greater than 3 -tot if new water & sewer revenue are included in the analysis). To date, the anticipated revenue that will be generated for these projects has outperformed the financial modeling undertaken during the design of the incentives program. Next Steps Wel The next major milestone of the development incentives pilot program is the second annual report, which will be brought before Common Council in December. The annual report will provide more detailed estimates of potential revenue, commitments to the incentives operating reserve fund, and any recommend changes or alterations to the program. The results of Common Council's service based budgeting process and the priorities of the Central Peninsula Neighbourhood Plan will help to inform any potential changes to the program. W ,temaining Budget: 2017 Growth Reserva Updated: October 30t", 2017 31 Fair taxation analysis $25,000 Common Council adopted on March 27`n, 2017 HDC support for Local Immigration $30,000 Common Council adopted on March Partnership 27`n, 2017 Creation of Population Growth $50,000 Common Council adopted on March Manager role 27`n, 2017 Value proposition exercise $40,000 Common Council adopted on March 27`n, 2017 Real Estate Alignment Exercise $90,000 Common Council adopted on March 27`n, 2017 Urban Development Incentive Program: $25,000 Common Council adopted on July loth, Beautification Grant 2017 One-time Develop SJ expenditures $25,000 Common Council adopted on October 16`n, 2017 SUBTOTAL: $285,000 Remaining Reserve $165,000 Undefined and unallocated NMESM 111 31 COUNCIL REPORT Report Date October 31, 2017 Meeting Date November 07, 2017 Service Area Growth and Community Development Services His Worship Mayor Don Darling and Members of the Growth Committee SUBJECT: Development Signage Pilot Project Proposal OPEN OR CLOSED SESSION This matter is to be discussed in open session of the Growth Committee. AUTHORIZATION Primary Author Commissioner/Dept. Head City Manager Jennifer Brown Phil Ouellette/Jacqueline Hamilton Jeff Trail RECOMMENDATION Growth Committee recommend to Common Council that up to a maximum of $11,475 be released from the 2017 Growth Reserve to initiate the Development Signage Pilot Project as described in this report to support marketing of development opportunities in the City. Report During the October 3rd meeting, the Growth Committee suggested that staff explore a signage program with the goal of garnering public awareness, support and excitement around significant development projects. The purpose of this report is to recommend a budget allocation for 2017 to enable implementation of a small scale pilot program to market development opportunities in the City that align with the City's growth initiatives. The recommended pilot signage project proposes to utilize on-site signage to advertise development concepts for highly visible sites and off-site billboards to promote urban living opportunities in Saint John. Signage for two high-profile sites, recently divested from the WA municipal land inventory, and a single billboard are recommended for implementation before the 2017 fiscal year end. Pilot Project Breakdown The pilot project will focus on previously owned municipal properties, promoting sites with high-quality development projects that have received approval from Common Council. Signage will be developed in a manner consistent with current City of Saint John branding. Collaboration with Develop SJ and Uptown Saint John will be undertaken to ensure the "look and feel" and messaging is complementary. Billboard Component: A billboard marketing the unique urban lifestyle and housing opportunities within the City will be installed on a high -traffic roadway exiting/entering the Primary Development Area. With the target audience being commuter traffic entering and leaving the City, it will be important for the messaging to be creative, engaging, and easily seen by motorists. City Staff will work with marketing and graphic design consultants to develop a graphic design concept, clearly directing ownership back to the City and conveying a welcoming, growth -focused message. Construction Signage: On-site signage is geared towards slow-moving traffic and pedestrians, advertising "up and coming" development projects at the site. This signage will include high-quality renderings and a description of the approved development, developer and City contact information in both official languages, and City branding. Linking the viewer back to a website or providing a pathway to more information is key to the successful delivery of the message. Steps must be taken to make the development proposals visible on the City's website. Due to the limited timeframe for implementation in 2017, the focus for the on-site signage will be sites identified under the Roadmap to Smart Growth. Cost Breakdown: Billboard: One 10' x 20' billboard; six month term; rotating location every 4 weeks with graphic design/creative included: $950 per month x 6 months = $5700 $100 per poster x 8 = $800 Total: $6500 + tax = $7,475 Construction Signage Creative (one time cost): Total: $2,000 091 Printing 2' x 3' dibond sign: Total: $800 Display materials (dependent on sign location): Materials and installation Total: approximately $1,200 Pilot Project Projected Cost: $11,475 Evaluation of Success The effectiveness of the pilot project will be measured through a combination of engagement, research and web analytics. Solicit Feedback: Developers will be asked to provide feedback on the effect of the on-site signage on their sales figures. This feedback will be facilitated through a survey or questionnaire distributed via email. Webpage Statistics: A landing page will be set up to provide renderings and additional information to the public. The URL for the page will be simple, easy to remember and visible on the billboards and on-site signage. The effectiveness of the billboards can, in part, be determined by the number of visits to the landing page. Social Media Tracking: Tracking reach and monitoring feedback on the pilot project will be facilitated through social media. Data reflecting the number of people who saw social media posts and how many of them live within the City versus outside of the City, and interactions with the posts (shares, likes, comments) will be created and evaluated throughout the pilot project. 2018-2019 Consideration Staff will pursue the development of a Development Signage Policy should the proposed pilot project be well-received. A robust signage policy would include different types of signage to support the City's growth goals and promote the City's development programs. Products like building wraps for redevelopment projects that have received funding from the Urban Incentives Program would be a strong example of the desired direction for future policy implementation. As the intent of implementing a signage policy would be to advertise significant development projects, effort would need to be directed towards defining criteria for inclusion in the program. Input from stakeholders and other municipal agencies as to the definition of 'significant' will be imperative to ensure the project is contained and manageable. The focus on 011 municipal assets at the pilot stage allows for enriched policy development while the logistics of broader, public implementation are explored. As a full policy is explored, a cost sharing model between the City and the Developer will be proposed. On-site signage would be facilitated through matching contributions with developers. Any off-site signage, such as billboards, would require a more complex funding system as it may involve a public-private partnership with City agencies and developers with contributions spanning over several months. Existing By-law Considerations Implementation of a development signage pilot project conforms to the regulations set out in section 7.10(1), Construction Signs, of the current zoning by-law. Signs with a maximum total face of 28 square metres which provide an announcement concerning a proposed development to occur on the same lot are permitted in all zones with the caveat that they must be removed within 14 days after completion of the work. Billboards are only permitted in the Corridor Commercial, Regional Commercial, Light Industrial, Medium Industrial, Heavy Industrial, Pit and Quarry, and Rural zones. The proposed pilot project would utilize established billboard space and would not require additional permits. Future Considerations Developing and implementing a signage policy will require the coordination of several municipal agencies. Ownership of the program will need to be defined as each sign will require permitting, monitoring, and a certain degree of enforcement. Ensuring signage portrays effective messaging consistent with the City's Communications Plan and the Growth Committee's goals will require an ongoing commitment to the implementation of the policy. Implementation of a development signage policy would require linkages and content updates to the City's website. Signage must link the viewer back to an informative place if it is to be effective. Information pertaining to any new signage requirements would need to be added to the One Stop permitting packages and any templates or requirements provided on the City's website. Further exploration into the internal capacity to complete the required changes to the website is necessary previous to the implementation of a development signage policy. W I A m Q) Q) 4 -j O Q) Q) 0 Q) Q) 4--j 4--j E E O-0 U v +-j > O 4-j U) 6m r L) u u r 0-0 W 4 o CL 0 CL CL 13L 0 I r rrw rr � rr rr r w 9 N u Q V O t O 4, O N El z z y Z? O O Oa U 3 m p O O O O f0 E Z W c CL o = a a H `� di N O Y 7 O O N r -I O O 00 O O EJ O O O O O O N r -I ■ I u U a 0 CL 0 OL 0 4- 0 d) a 0 CL E 0 u 0 0 0 0 Cb z z 'o >su 4- 4� W d) W M z z z z 1111111III in CY) r-� 0 rl� z a a ko ,q 9 N 0 Z ko > O 0 Z M u N 0 U 0 0 L N N N ho N a 9 u 00 i E E O U E O _U N ot El i law t am hQ) U O N L LL 1= .22 tr C 0 0 CL 0 vlo a A ko O 4--) Q) (� �- j V) U O . Q) a--) C) (a) 0- C-) O O ?: � Q) U E C� a --j �QLL Q) Q) U C� cn Q) W � N U Q) Q) O 0 Q) O v Q) E Q) M n L.- X LL Q) O 4--J (O Q) D 70A O 4--J (O Q) D 70A O 4--J (O Q) D 70A UO C Q) 4--J (O 4--J X Q) z