Presentation to Corporate Services Committee

The Ottawa Forests and Greenspace Advisory Committee is concerned that the process and principles involved in the decision-making process for the sale of land does not pay enough attention to either the principles outlined in the Official Plan or to the ecological value of the land.

We are supported in our concerns by the Environmental Advisory Committee.

You have before you a report on the sale of city-owned land for the period 2001-2003. If you go back to the reports and strategy documents written in 2001 (ACS2001-CRS-RPR-0058), you will see that the Disposal Principles do not clearly indicate that ecologically valuable land is to be retained in city ownership. We paraphrase them as follows:

• Disposal in an open fair and transparent manner
• Based on market value
• Hold land in support of City Mandated Programs (CMP)or strategic purposes only
• Hold in support of CMP where capital funding is approved or identified
• Sell if no CMP or strategic purpose
• Ensure value for money; efforts priorized on marketability and value
• Purchase of non-viable property when full cost of disposal offset by $$ generated
• Property allocated to CMP through asset rationalization will be identified in capital budget process and reported at market value

The report makes it clear that generating revenue is an important driver in the process, and with little attention paid to environmental values. Sentences such as "… sustain our ability to generate revenue through new value added endeavours such as 'City as a Developer' and focusing available staff resources on those properties that will maximise sale revenue and return on investment" do not indicate that staff are placing a high value on the retention of ecologically valuable land. Nor do the adherence to the principles regarding the acquisition and retention of greenspace as outlined in the Official Plan figure highly in this report.

The background to this request stems from the sale of two parcels of city owned land, declared surplus to city needs, and both with high ecological value. One of those parcels is said to be the home of or habitat for at least one if not two federally listed Endangered Species.

At the time the land was being proposed for sale (June 2003) OFAC formally asked CSED to refrain from selling the land until a thorough environmental assessment of its ecological value had been made. The staff report did not, in our view (and that of other intervenors that day) reflect the ecological value of the land. There was considerable scientific information available in city files to demonstrate its value but that information may not have been fully available or perhaps understood. The land was listed in the former Region's NESS study - it should not have been sold.

It is not our purpose today to cast blame for the events that led to the sale of 5309 Bank Street (and the Hawthorne Marsh) but rather to ask you to set in place a process that requires city staff to thoroughly document the ecological value of land prior to its disposal and, where land has been so-identified, to keep that land in the City's inventory.

The irony of the sale of 5309 Bank St. is that the revenue was placed in a fund that seeks to buy land that may have lower ecological value elsewhere in the city. And, the former South Gloucester Conservation Area, of which this particular parcel was once part, was on the list of land deemed important for the city to acquire for conservation purposes. In other words, there was money in the 2003 capital budget to add to the land acquisition in the area - not to sell it.

You approved an Official Plan that commits the City to develop a Greenspace Master Plan. You also approved many excellent statements in that Official Plan that speak to the value of greenspace, forests, wetlands and other ecologically valuable land.

Sections 1.3 and 2.5.4.1 are but two of the sections in the Official Plan that speak to the need to protect greenspace and ecologically valuable land. It is important that you direct staff to implement those policies and procedures outlined in our bylaw, the 20/20 documents and the Official Plan.

A Policy Annex to the bylaw (No. 2002-38) that governs the disposal of city-owned land also contains provisions for the evaluation of the environmental importance of land but either that evaluation does not seem to carry as much weight as the economic imperative to sell land and generate revenue for the city or the information on ecological importance of some lands is not available or understood. We have three recommendations to make:

1. We urge you to place greater emphasis on ecological value in the asset rationalisation process and to direct staff to specifically consider those values in the written report that comes to you for decision when land is proposed for sale. The requirement to preserve "natural habitats and a network of greenspace" as stated in the OP should be the first and most important consideration in the evaluation process. If the land is ecologically important, if it is tree-covered, a wetland, a meadow and even if it is not in the inventories of environmentally sensitive land that staff are developing, take a second look and require an ecological evaluation. The current in-house consultation that takes place is not adequate, in our view.
2. Direct staff to establish procedures, to ensure that the environmental evaluations are carried out in a thorough and professional manner. Equip your staff with the necessary tools to ensure that the entire body of information about the land in question is made available - require thorough literature searches and consultation with your Advisory Committees and with knowledgeable NGOs be undertaken if there is any hint that the land has ecological value. OFGAC, the Ottawa Field-Naturalists' Club, and the Greenspace Alliance of Canada's Capital all offered last June to assist in these matters. Take us up on that offer or else there may be little reason to write a Greenspace Master Plan - much of the good land will be gone.
3. There is an Environmental Audit paragraph in the Policy Annex to the Real Property Disposal Bylaw. Establish an Environmental Audit committee (either as a subcommittee of your committee or as a staff committee) to ensure that the requirements of that Annex are implemented - make sure that it is used effectively and at all times.

   Industrial growth should not be the imperative driving City land sales. We heard time and time again in the 20/20 process and during OP consultation that a major factor in decisions to locate new businesses in Ottawa was the green and clean environment - the trees, forests, open spaces - in short, the greenspace. Trees, forests and greenspace are also major determinants in people's perception of their well-being and the contributions that these determinants make to the economic vales of our homes and environs. You control the fate of city-owned land and greenspace.

Please ensure that future land sales are guided first and foremost by green principles.