Agenda Index City of Vancouver

POLICY REPORT
DEVELOPMENT AND BUILDING

TO:

Vancouver City Council

FROM:

Director of Current Planning

SUBJECT:

City Initiated Rezoning - Vancouver Convention and Exhibition Centre (VCEC) Site - 100 Thurlow Street

 

RECOMMENDATION

GENERAL MANAGER'S COMMENTS

COUNCIL POLICY

Council Policies applicable to this site include:
· Central Area Plan approved December 1991;
· Coal Harbour Policy Statement approved June 1990;
· Waterfront Pedestrian/Bicycle Pathway Widths Policy approved March 1997;
· Coal Harbour Official Development Plan (CH ODP) approved November1990; and
· Burrard Landing CD-1 (363) By-law No. 7679, Guidelines, Form of Development approved November 1996.

Recent Council discussion affecting the policy context includes:

On February 20, 2001, Vancouver City Council (In Camera) reaffirmed its commitment to the Coal Harbour Arts Complex program, its waterfront site, and the objective of achieving both the arts complex and the convention centre on the Burrard Landing sites and authorized the City Manager, in consultation with the Director, Office of Cultural Affairs, to commence discussions with the Trade and Convention Centre and senior levels of government.

On September 20, 2001 Council received for Information the report "Vancouver Convention and Exhibition Centre Expansion - Pre-rezoning Design Review" dated September 12, 2001. This report outlined outstanding issues to be resolved. Council also considered the report "Expanding the Vancouver Convention and Exhibition Centre -Financial Assessment of the October 2000 Business Plan" dated September 18, 2001 and resolved as follows:

A. THAT Council support the general concept, subject to City of Vancouver approvals through rezoning and subsequent approval processes, of an expansion to and renovation of the existing Vancouver Convention and Exhibition Centre (VCEC), to the west of the existing facility as described in the October 2000 business plan authored by the Vancouver Convention Centre Expansion Task Force.

PURPOSE AND SUMMARY

This report recommends a pro-active approach to assist in securing the Burrard Landing site for the proposed Convention and Exhibition Centre expansion to be achieved through an intensive program addressing a City initiated rezoning of the proposed site. This program would also resolve servicing issues affecting Council approved rezoning conditions for 201 Burrard Street.


DISCUSSION

Background: The Burrard Landing site north of Canada Place is considered an acceptable and desirable site for expansion of the convention and exhibition centre for numerous reasons. These include a less complicated project program, less disruption of access patterns to the existing centre, minimum operational disruption during construction, spectacular visual orientation, direct linkages to related amenities, reduced construction cost, good potential for integration with the city, retention of future options for port related uses to the east and a "clean" ownership structure. Therefore there is a strong rationale to seek greater certainty that this location can continue to be considered for the proposed expansion.

The viability of developing the proposed scale of expansion on this site has also been substantially tested. Significant progress has been achieved in resolving conceptual planning issues through a joint workshop process culminating November 2, 2001. As the September 20, 2001, Information report noted above concludes, "staff have reasonable confidence that identified issues can be resolved with further work committed by the proponents".

Rezoning Strategy: A City initiated rezoning application at this time would seek to amend the Coal Harbour Official Development Plan and establish a "shell" CD-1 zoning which enables securing of the site. The current CD-1 by-law does not accommodate a convention and exhibition centre expansion. Through a public input process the new zoning would provide for desired uses, densities and only those development parameters fundamental to a viable expansion, without committing to a specific design which would come forward when full project funding is announced. Substantive conditions would be established requiring full resolution of form issues through further detailed, technical and public process once final development proponents are confirmed allowing resources to be applied to a detailed design. Extention of Canada Place and Thurlow Street and related servicing issues would also be fully resolved to permit adjacent development to proceed.

Existing Zoning: Coal Harbour ODP and Burrard Landing CD-1 provisions do not list Convention and Exhibition Centre as a use and need to be amended to provide for this option. In addition to a 10 000 m² Arts Complex, CD-1 By-law 7679 (#363) for Burrard Landing provides for a total commercial floor area of 65 523 m² (705,307 sq. ft.) in a mix of uses apportioned among several sites, totalling floor areas as follows:

1

hotel

37 000 m² ( 398,278 sq .ft.)

2

office

22 688 m² (244,220 sq. ft.)*

3

retail, service commercial

5 835 m² (62,809 sq. ft.)

4

Arts Complex

10 000 m² (107,643 sq.ft.)

ag020312.htm

Proposed Rezoning: A rezoning would retain the previously approved potentials outlined above while additionally providing for convention and exhibition centre development as an alternative to the office/hotel use and density. If those potentials are eventually pursued in the absence of a convention centre expansion, a new form of development would be anticipated, requiring a public process leading to Council approval.

The proposed VCEC expansion would entail a net floor area for facilities of approximately 39 000 m² (420,000 sq. ft.), plus ancillary functions and related commercial uses. Initial estimates indicate that an approximate 10% increase in density may be needed toaccommodate the total proposed ancillary floor space. While a desire for additional animating commercial use could also increase the floor area, potential supportable below grade floor space exclusions may offset these increases. Existing ownership, floor space potential and other commitments to the Arts Complex would not be diminished as a result of the proposed rezoning.

Viaduct and Servicing: It may be necessary and in the City's interest to bring forward decisions on land exchanges, parcel reconfiguration, street alignments and related legal agreements prior to enactment of the rezoning. Staff will report back on these elements as required.

Merits of Strategy: This approach allows the City to take a pro-active role, facilitating an incremental step forward on a project for which Council has declared support and further demonstrates support for the VCEC expansion initiative. It would assist in securing the preferred site for expansion. Marathon would benefit from greater certainty of the future road alignments enabling them to proceed with construction of the Thurlow Street viaduct, and possibly proceed with the Canada Place viaduct extention. It would also allow the owner to resolve outstanding servicing needs for 201 Burrard Street, as approved by Council in rezoning conditions.

This would also be a proactive step in securing City interests in this site. Conditions of approval would establish goal posts for design of the project at the development application stage consistent with recent staff reviews as reported to Council on September 20, 2001. The resulting form of development would need to be approved by Council based on a specific design. By setting these design objectives in conditions at this stage, the project proponent will know well in advance what will be expected at the detailed design stage. This would facilitate a faster, smoother application process once funding is available and the urgency of proceeding is critical.

From the public's point of view, the question presented to them at the rezoning stage would be a simpler one. It would focus on the acceptability of the principal and ancillary uses and related commercial activity. Questions of form would be kept to establishing appropriate design principles. This incremental approach focusses the public process on the fundamental use question and leaves design specifics which cannot be determined now to the next stage.

There are also some drawbacks. The specific needs of a developer are not known. The tight time frame also limits the extent of public process and staff review which is possible. Staff would convene open houses and a public meeting. As a result, the likelihood of subsequent text amendments is greater. A second public process, albeit fairly straight forward, would be necessary to gain input on the actual design. It is also possible that the public will have greater difficulty understanding the proposal without a specific design. On balance, the proposed approach offers significant benefits without unmanageable complications.

Process: Although the recommended process is abbreviated, staff familiarity with the most recent proposal and the hands-on approach made possible by a City-initiated rezoning makeit possible to still include the normal requirements for public input, policy review and interdepartmental review. Target dates, including Public Hearing in July and enactment by November are shown in Appendix A with the resulting budget shown in Appendix B.

Rezoning Program Staffing: Recent Council approval of core cost recovery planning staff assists in avoiding delays inherent in recruiting staff and gearing up a project team. Cost recovery planning staff with experience on this project will be engaged to co-ordinate a public process and inputs of staff previously involved in the Pre-Rezoning Design Review of conceptual planning issues in 2001. This core VCEC team will be a continuation of the team used previously, augmented to prepare for immediate follow up on enactment agreements. It would benefit from existing knowledge and staff being up-to-speed.

The rezoning process, including enactment, would be 9 months duration from March to November 2002 for completion of enactment prior to Council change over. The team would report through the Major Projects Steering Committee, incorporating interdepartmental and "downstream" staff inputs from departments including Cultural Affairs, Engineering Legal Services, Development Services and Parks. The City would cover the direct City outlay costs of the shell zoning, form of development conditions. Costs of public consultation and Public Hearing would be attributable to the eventual rezoning. In total these costs are estimated to be $198,000. The property owner has also agreed to finance the anticipated $30,000 cost of fees for additional consultants' inputs into this process, which is included in Additional Program Costs shown in Appendix B.

In keeping with the cost recovery model, the City will seek to recover all rezoning costs when and if VCEC proceeds. The objective will be to ultimately recover the full processing cost from the beneficiaries of the rezoning, including work already undertaken, once a detailed design comes forward.

Site (Subdivision) and Streets Program Staffing: To resolve necessary site consolidation and street alignment issues and adjust legal agreements to secure necessary configurations and works, such as viaducts, to accommodate development on and adjacent to the site, extensive parallel work will be needed involving Engineering, Cultural Affairs, Planning, Development Services, Legal Services and Parks staff.

The budget has been structured to separate these costs, which result in immediate benefits to the property owner, from work which has future benefits primarily for the VCEC expansion. Therefore, Marathon would cover the cost of addressing servicing, infrastructure and legal agreement work related to completion of Canada Place viaduct, estimated to be $150,000.

Rezoning Fees As noted above, all costs associated with the rezoning are to be recovered through payment of the full rezoning fee, which is calculated to be $741,260, plus the ODP Amendment fee of $26,300. Expansion of the site could require extention of the Harbour Headline, which would imply a corresponding increase in the rezoning fee. Rezoning feesare set to include all facets of a rezoning, including scoping work already undertaken on the convention centre expansion proposal, and only partially paid for, together with future review and process to consider a form of development, which also involves public involvement steps. Therefore the full fee exceeds the current outlay for this segment of the process. It is anticipated that a `no development' covenant applicable to Convention and Exhibition Centre expansion will be required to secure fee payment.

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS

The advanced rezoning is anticipated to cost $378,000. The components that make up these costs are $294,350 for staffing and $83,650 for program costs, such as public hearing and consultancy expenses. Funding for these costs will be provided through a direct recovery from Marathon in 2002 in the amount of $150,000 for site, street and legal work related to the completion of the Canada Place viaduct and $30,000 paid directly for additional consultancy costs. The remaining cost of $198,000 will be recovered when and if the convention and exhibition centre expansion proceeds. These costs, therefore, are to be financed by the City until such time as the re-zoning fees (currently estimated at $741,260) are to be paid in full.

Given that the timing for the expansion is still uncertain, the City cannot recognize the revenue for this portion of the project in 2002. Therefore, funding for the $198,000, will need to be funded by the 2002 Operating Budget through contingency. Should the project proceed, the City will recover these costs and provide offsets to the operating budget at that time

CONCLUSION

Staff conclude that a City initiated rezoning of the Burrard Landing VCEC expansion site would have significant public benefits for a major public project for which Council has declared its support and for the City's interest in development of that site. It also facilitates completion of servicing work previously required by Council for the adjacent site to the south at 201 Burrard Street which assists the property owner in pursuing already approved development.

This approach offers the public input on the land use question separately from the design, form of development and other technical details relating to the Arts Complex, park, waterfront walkway and circulation issues which will follow. A subsequent technical review and public process at the development application stage will provide for public input on the form of development to be approved by Council at that time. In order to achieve rezoning and enactment on the very condensed timetable available, it is necessary for the Director of Current Planning to be instructed to make application immediately.

- - - - -
City Initiated VCEC Rezoning

Project Timetable

Condensed Timetable

Completion Target Dates

Confirm Scoping Information

February 8, 2002

Draft Report

February 15, 2002

Report to Clerk

February 21, 2002

Council Decision to Proceed

March 12, 2002

Circulation of Proposed Rezoning

March 13, 2002

Notification, Ads

March 15, 2002

Return Dept Comments

April 5, 2002

Conduct Policy Review

April 5, 2002

Complete Public Input

April 18, 2002

Complete Report to Clerks Office

May 28, 2002

Council Referral (P&E Comm)

June 11, 2002

PH (request unscheduled date)

July 23, 2002

PH (back up)

August 1, 2002

Enactment Instructions

August 9, 2002

Complete Engineering Details

October 31, 2002

Complete Parcel Reconfiguration

October 31, 2002

Draft and revise Legal Agreements

October 31, 2002

Enactment Report to Council

November 26, 2002

NOTE: Scheduling of work related to the viaduct servicing and parcel configuration will be reported separately to Council, as required.

City Initiated VCEC Rezoning
Draft Budget

     

Site, Streets, Agreements

Future Zoning Benefit

Staffing

FTE

Cost

Owner's Cost

Future Recovery

         

Solicitor

1

      

Planning Analyst

1

      

Senior Planner

1

      

Civil Eng I (4)

1

      

Urban Designer PIII

)

      

Subdivision Co-Ord

)

      

Cultural Planner

) 1

      

Park Planner

)

      

Development Services / Fire

)

      
         

Total Salaries, Benefits

  

$294,350

$150,000

$144,350

         

Public Consultation

        

Public Hearing

        

Overtime

        

Consultants, Supplies,
Services

        

Contingency

       

External Consultants

    

$30,000

  

Additional Program Costs

 

$83,650

  

$53,650

         

Total Outlay Cost

  

$378,000

$180,000

$198,000

         

Office Space

        

Allocated Costs

        

Corp Serv

        

Commun Serv

        
         

Total Internal Costs

  

$77,500

$ -

$77,500

         

Total Budget

  

$455,500

$180,000

$275,500

Additional Council resolutions pursuant to the report "Expanding the Vancouver Convention and Exhibition Centre - Financial Assessment of the October 2000 Business Plan" dated September 18, 2001.

B. (i) THAT Council direct staff to notify the federal and provincial governments and the Vancouver Convention Centre Expansion Task Force that the City is prepared to make a financial contribution to the proposed project in the form of an exemption from annual municipal property taxes to the convention centre portion of the complex; and

B. (ii) THAT Council direct staff to notify the federal and provincial governments and the Vancouver Convention Centre Expansion Task Force that the commercial portions of the property such as parking, retail and marina operations will not be exempted from annual municipal property taxes.

C. THAT Council direct staff to notify the federal and provincial governments and the Vancouver Convention Centre Expansion Task Force that the expanded convention centre will be subject to full development related costs, including Development Cost Levies, development and building permit fees and ongoing utility and licence fees that are associated with the project.

D. THAT Council instruct the City Manager to meet with staff from the federal and provincial governments and the Convention Centre Expansion Task Force to review the options for funding the expansion, including those outlined in this report, and to report back to Council on the impacts of these options on the project, on the City and on the marketing of tourism activity in the City.

* * * * *

ag020312.htm

Comments or questions? You can send us email.
[City Homepage] [Get In Touch]

(c) 1998 City of Vancouver