City of Vancouver
Inter-Office Correspondence
CITY MANAGER S OFFICE
DATE: September 20, 1996
MEMO TO: Mayor and Members of Council
FROM: Ken Dobell, City Manager
COPY TO: Hugh Creighton, Director of Finance
Maria Kinsella, City Clerk
Corporate Management Team
SUBJECT: Coordinated Capital Planning: 1997 to 1999
Council will be receiving input from the public on the proposed capital
plan on Monday, September 23. We anticipate that Council will hear
from a number of people who will argue that various areas of the plan
require additional funding. The proposed plan is sized to stay as
closely as possible within the guidelines for the cost of debt
previously established by Council. Within that plan, as previously
reported, the allocations are based on the general priorities
established by Council.
As in the past few plans, the review process has identified many more
desirable projects than can be funded within the guidelines. Nothing
has been provided in this plan to address earthquake upgrades for major
City facilities, or for new library facilities; engineering
infrastructure projects have been funded below the levels that would be
desirable; and funding for the Park Board does not provide the level of funding which would be required to undertake major upgrades or
replacements to existing community centres. Cultural and social
infrastructure and housing capital allocations could justifiably be
expanded were it not for necessary funding limits.
Major development projects are providing some new capital facilities,
particularly the two community centres and child care facilities
provided in the Concord and Marathon developments. Major developments
also provide the necessary funding for additions or upgrades to
engineering works necessary to serve them. However, the City Council
policies which are considered necessary to protect the City s overall
financial position, coupled with major increases in capital requirements
for GVRD sewer and water facilities, limit our capability to meet many
legitimate capital demands.
It is an appropriate time to consider more creative and economical ways
to fund and develop some capital facilities. While capital works such as upgrading structures for earthquake resistance, maintaining core
sewer, water, and streets assets, and developing capabilities such as
communications systems and works yards will likely always be fully
funded by the City, there may be an opportunity to develop some
facilities jointly between departments and in conjunction with the
private sector. To the extent this is possible, we can develop
facilities to provide a higher service level to the community without
increased borrowing.
Some years ago, the City developed a combined Fire Hall and Library on a
single site. This was not an easy process, as the participating
departments initially were concerned that they would lose the
functionality they require. However, now that the facility has been
operating for some time, both departments find it entirely satisfactory.
Similar opportunities may exist in future to combine Fire Halls, Libraries, and Community Centres with each other, perhaps including
smaller facilities for community police operations, integrated service
teams, and nonprofit organizations. Land and building costs could be
reduced through shared common facilities. In some cases, the operations
would be complementary, and operating benefits beyond the savings in
capital costs could be obtained. The development of such combined
facilities could mesh well with the CityPlan process, providing enhanced
services in neighbourhoods which accommodate growth.
Development of such integrated facilities requires a longer planning
horizon and more coordination than the present capital plan process.
Departments would have to be more specific in their longer term needs,
based on Council approved planning directions. Some planning around
specific area needs and locations would be required to establish the
feasibility of specific integrated proposals. Rezoning and possibly
site acquisition might be necessary for these larger facilities. In
this context, the need for longer term planning is obvious.
Such planning could also open up the opportunity for obtaining these
facilities partly or wholly as amenities in private sector
redevelopment. A longer term plan would create a greater potential for
public-private developments containing commercial facilities as well as
City operations. When such a plan was established, the City would be
able to advise potential partners and developers of the opportunities
open to them to meet City needs while achieving their own objectives.
Coordinated with the community planning process which will take place
through CityPlan, this approach to capital planning would allow the City
to take maximum advantage of opportunities to provide required new
facilities at the lowest possible cost.
It is appropriate to recognize this longer term opportunity as the
proposed 1997-1999 capital plan is being finalized. The 1997-1999 plan
will meet the core needs of the City for that period. Longer term
demands, however, are accumulating, and must be addressed. A capital facility planning process which begins in 1997, targeted to the next
capital plan to be submitted to the voters in 1999, would be an
appropriate way to begin to address these needs. It is important to
note that there is no magic in these proposals. Combined facilities
will be complex and difficult to put in place, and funding limitations
will still be severe. However, the next capital plan will extend into
the twenty first century, and new and more creative approaches to
capital financing will almost certainly be a necessity.
Staff will report to the 1997 Council with a proposed process to address
these options. We wanted Council members and the community to be aware
of this possibility as they consider the proposed 1997-1999 capital
plan.
Ken Dobell City Manager