CITY OF CHILLIWACK - CivicInfo
City of Chilliwack
ALC Economic Impact Study
Report
Date: January 28, 2000
USL File: 1103627.1
File Name: y:\anwelch\chilliwack\report
104A-1815 Kirschner Road
Kelowna, B.C., V1Y 4N7
Telephone: (250) 762-2517
Fax: (250) 763-5266
Table of Contents
Executive Summary iv
1. Introduction 1
1. Background and Purpose 1
2. Approach 1
3. Format 2
2. Economic Impact ( Past 3
1. Models of Development 3
1. Model 1a: Chilliwack Today 3
2. Model 1b: Valley Focus (past) 3
2. Differences in Capital Costs 5
1. Water 5
1. Model 1a: Chilliwack Today 6
2. Model 1b: Valley Focus (past) 6
2. Sewer 6
1. Model 1a: Chilliwack Today 7
2. Model 1b: Valley Focus (past) 7
3. Drainage 8
1. Model 1a: Chilliwack Today 8
2. Model 1b: Valley Focus (past) 8
4. Roads 9
1. Model 1a: Chilliwack Today 9
2. Model 1b: Valley Focus (past) 9
5. Parks, Recreation and Libraries 9
1. Model 1a: Chilliwack Today 10
2. Model 1b: Valley Focus (past) 10
6. Fire Department 11
7. Other 11
3. Differences in Non-residential Assessment 11
1. Past Economic Development Opportunities 12
2. Assessed Values of Past Opportunities 12
3. Property Tax Revenues 14
4. Conclusion 14
3. Economic Impact ( Future 16
1. Models of Development 16
1. Model 2a: New OCP with Upland Expansion (future) 16
2. Model 2b: Valley Focus (future) 18
3. Model 2c: Favoured Direction (future) 20
2. Differences in Capital Costs 22
1. Water 22
1. Model 2a: New OCP with Upland Expansion (future) 22
2. Model 2b: Valley Focus (future) 23
3. Model 2c: Favoured Direction (future) 24
2. Sewer 25
1. Model 2a: New OCP with Upland Expansion (future) 25
2. Model 2b: Valley Focus (future) 26
3. Model 2c: Favoured Direction (future) 27
3. Drainage 28
1. Model 2a: New OCP with Upland Expansion (future) 28
2. Model 2b: Valley Focus (future) 29
3. Model 2c: Favoured Direction (future) 30
4. Roads 30
1. Model 2a: New OCP with Upland Expansion (future) 31
2. Model 2b: Valley Focus (future) 32
3. Model 2c: Favoured Direction (future) 33
5. Parks, Recreation and Libraries 34
1. Model 2a: New OCP with Upland Expansion (future) 34
2. Model 2b: Valley Focus (future) 36
3. Model 2c: Favoured Direction (future) 37
6. Fire Department 39
1. Model 2a: New OCP with Upland Expansion (future) 40
2. Model 2b: Valley Focus (future) 41
3. Model 2c: Favoured Direction (future) 41
7. Other 42
1. R.C.M.P. 42
2. Urban Transit. 43
3. Differences in Non-residential Assessment 44
1. Value of Business Park Developments 45
4. Conclusion 46
4. Conclusion 48
Appendices
Appendix 1: Forgone Tax Revenues from Past Economic Development Opportunities (
Spreadsheet
Appendix 2: Differences in Future Capital Costs ( Spreadsheets
Appendix 3: Value of Future Business Park Developments ( Spreadsheet
Executive Summary
This study was commissioned on the premise that the ALC's continued refusal to release ALR lands for new valley development has had – and will continue to have – a negative economic impact on the municipality. Urban Systems Ltd. was asked to quantify, to the extent possible, both the past and future economic impacts of the ALC's position.
The approach taken to determine the past economic impact involves a comparison of Chilliwack as it has developed in recent years, to Chilliwack as it would likely have developed had the ALC been more amenable to a compact, valley-focused pattern of development. The approach taken to determine the future economic impact involves a comparison of Chilliwack as it is forecasted to develop under the City's 1999 OCP, to Chilliwack as it could develop if the ALC were willing to release select valley lands for further urban growth.
Two models of development are presented for use in determining the past economic impact. Model 1a represents Chilliwack as it has actually developed since 1992. Model 1b represents Chilliwack as it would likely have developed from 1992 onward, had the ALC been more amenable to further development around the existing urban core in the valley.
Three models of development are presented to help determine the future economic impact. Model 2a, which represents Chilliwack as it is intended to develop under the 1999 OCP, is built around the ALC's refusal to allow future development on ALR lands in the valley. Model 2b accommodates all future growth on the valley floor, within a rational urban containment boundary. This model represents one plausible future development scenario that Chilliwack could pursue if the ALC were willing to release select ALR lands for future valley development. Model 2c is the (modified) favoured direction that the community developed during the recent Future Plan process. Each of the three future development models assumes an ultimate build-out population of 134,000 by year 2020.
The comparisons of the various models consider the following two indicators:
• the nature of the non-residential assessment base
• capital costs associated with the provision of off-site municipal infrastructure for new growth
The past economic impact is determined, in section 2 of the report, to be $20,516,897 (2000 dollars). This figure reflects both the extra servicing costs, and the forgone revenues, associated with Chilliwack's development between 1992 and 1999.
Two future economic impact estimates are provided in section 3 of the report. The estimate of $161,905,364 represents the net present value of the future cost to the City of developing under the new OCP (Model 2a), instead of under a more compact, valley-focused development pattern (Model 2b). The estimate of $81,119,909 represents the net present value of the future cost to the City of developing under the new OCP (Model 2a), instead of under the Future Plan Committee's (modified) favoured direction (Model 2c).
The estimates determined in this report are not considered to be precise, definitive measurements of the ALC's actual past and future economic impacts. The estimates are, instead, offered as order-of-magnitude, defensible measures of what the ALC's past economic impact has been, and what the ALC's future economic impact is likely to be.
1. Introduction
1.1 Background and Purpose
The City of Chilliwack is a growing municipality of 65,000 situated in British Columbia's Fraser Valley. Approximately 70% of the land within the City's boundary is included in the provincial Agricultural Land Reserve (ALR), which is administered by the Agricultural Land Commission (ALC). Over the years, the ALC has been very reluctant to release ALR lands for additional urban development on the valley floor in Chilliwack. Most recently, the ALC rejected three separate requests made by the City's Future Plan Committee to release select valley lands intended to accommodate future residential, industrial and commercial growth within a slightly-enlarged urban containment boundary.
The ALC's continued refusal to release lands for new valley development has forced – and will continue to force – the City to direct new growth southward into the upland regions, away from the existing urban areas. The City believes that this requirement to accommodate new growth outside of the valley has had – and will continue to have – a negative economic impact on the municipality.
In October, 1999, the City of Chilliwack commissioned Urban Systems Ltd. to study the actual impact on the municipality of the ALC's refusal to release valley lands for new urban development. More specifically, Urban Systems was asked to quantify, to the extent possible, both the past and future economic impacts of the ALC's position.
1.2 Approach
In simple terms, the approach taken to determine the past economic impact of the ALC's position involves a comparison of Chilliwack as it has developed in recent years, to Chilliwack as it would likely have developed had the ALC been more amenable to a compact, valley-focused pattern of development. The approach taken to determine the future economic impact involves a comparison of Chilliwack as it is forecasted to develop under the City's 1999 OCP, to Chilliwack as it could develop if the ALC were willing to release select valley lands for further urban growth.
Various models of past and future development are presented for purposes of comparison. The models were designed based on an extensive review of municipal planning documents and Future Plan Committee reports, as well as discussions with key City department heads.
To determine the past and future economic impacts, the comparisons of the models consider the following two indicators:
• the nature of the non-residential assessment base
• capital costs associated with the provision of off-site municipal infrastructure for new growth
The non-residential assessment base and capital cost data for each model were obtained from the City's various economic development reports, municipal finance documents and comprehensive development plans, as well as through interviews with City department heads and key staff.
It should be noted that the approach taken by the consultants is not designed to calculate the precise and definitive past and future economic impacts. The determination of precise and definitive impacts would involve the detailed study of many economic indicators and their interrelationships. Such an exercise is beyond the scope of this study. The approach taken on this project is, instead, intended to generate order-of-magnitude, defensible estimates of what the past economic impact has been, and what the future economic impact is likely to be.
1.3 Format
This report presents the results of Urban Systems' study into the ALC's past and future economic impacts on Chilliwack. The report is divided into four sections:
• Section 2 focuses on the past economic impact. Two models of past development are presented and explained. Differences in capital costs for major infrastructure and services under each model are compared, as are differences in non-residential assessment bases. An overall estimate of the ALC's past economic impact is provided.
• Section 3 addresses the future economic impact. Three models of future development are outlined. Differences in capital costs for major infrastructure and services associated with each model are compared, along with differences in non-residential assessment base estimates. Two estimates of the overall future economic impact are provided and explained.
• Section 4 concludes the report with review of the report's key findings.
2. Economic Impact ( Past
2.1 Models of Development
Two models of development were created for use in determining the past economic impact of the ALC on the municipality. This section of the report outlines the key characteristics of each model.
1. Model 1a: Chilliwack Today
Model 1a (see figure 1) represents Chilliwack as it has actually developed since 1992. 1992 is important because it was the year in which the City, in response to the actions of the ALC, began to develop the upland area of Promontory. Prior to this time, most urban development had occurred on the valley floor, primarily in Chilliwack Proper and Sardis-Vedder.
Table 2.1.1a shows how Chilliwack's current population is distributed throughout the municipality.
Table 2.1.1a
Distribution of Current Population
| |Current Population |
|Region within Chilliwack | |
|Chilliwack Proper |31,434 |
|Sardis-Vedder |18,130 |
|Chilliwack Mountain |1,029 |
|Promontory |2,626 |
|Ryder Lake |797 |
|Eastern Hillsides |511 |
|Other Rural |7,417 |
|Non-Private Households |1,498 |
|First Nations Reserve Population |1,800 |
|Total |65,242 |
2. Model 1b: Valley Focus (past)
Model 1b (see figure 2) represents Chilliwack as it would likely have developed from 1992 onward, had the ALC been more amendable to further development around the existing urban core in the valley. The following points describe Model 1b in detail:
➢ Residential Growth ( The bulk of new residential development is situated on the valley floor. The model assumes that valley development from 1992 would have occurred only in accordance with accepted planning principles. For example, new development would have occurred:
- adjacent to existing urban areas only
- on the least productive agricultural lands available
- on lands with good service and transportation links to existing urban areas
- on lands near Chilliwack Proper
A 76 hectare parcel of valley land near Prest Road (see figure 2) is selected as the area in which most new residential growth would have occurred. As a development area, Prest Road conforms to the key planning principles listed earlier. For example:
- it is adjacent to an existing urban area (Chilliwack Proper)
- it consists primarily of Class 4 agricultural land, which is lower in terms of agricultural capability than other areas in the valley
- it has excellent links to existing transportation and servicing systems
At a relatively low density of 12 units per hectare, the Prest Road area would have accommodated the 2,626 people currently in Promontory. The model, with its valley focus, assumes that Promontory would not have been serviced or designated for urban development. Table 2.1.2a shows how Chilliwack's current population of 65,242 is accommodated under Model 1b.
Table 2.1.2a
Accommodation of Current Population
| |Current Population |
|Region within Chilliwack | |
|Chilliwack Proper |31,434 |
|Sardis-Vedder |18,130 |
|Chilliwack Mountain |1,029 |
|Ryder Lake |797 |
|Eastern Hillsides |511 |
|Other Rural |7,417 |
|Non-Private Households |1,498 |
|First Nations Reserve Population |1,800 |
|Prest Road (76 ha) |2,626 |
|Total |65,242 |
➢ Economic Development ( In recent years, a number of potential commercial and industrial ventures have been turned away from Chilliwack, in many cases because of the inability, or perceived inability, to access valley lands in the ALR. This model assumes that at least some of these potential ventures would have received access to the required lands and would have come to fruition.
2.2 Differences in Capital Costs
This section of the text explores key differences in off-site capital costs associated with the two past models of development. All major services are examined, including water, sewer, drainage, roads, parks and recreation, libraries, fire, police and transit. All costs have been converted to constant, year 2000 dollars using an annual inflation factor of 1.5%.
As explained in section 2.1, the distinguishing factor between Models 1a and 1b is Promontory. Model 1a accounts for the development of Promontory as has actually occurred since 1992, whereas 1b assumes that Promontory would not have been developed at all. Model 1b assumes, further, that the 2,626 people who live in Promontory under 1a would have been accommodated in the 76 ha section of land along Prest Road.
Before identifying the servicing costs for each model, the following two points of information should be considered:
• Costs Applicable to Specific Population ( When comparing the costs to service Promontory (Model 1a) and Prest Road (Model 1b), it is important to compare the specific costs required to service the population of 2,626 that is situated in each region. This need takes on particular importance when we consider the servicing that has been done for Promontory. City DCC records indicate that since 1992, over $21.6 million (2000 dollars) of roads, water, sewer, drainage and parks infrastructure have been built into Promontory to accommodate development. These works, however, have been constructed to benefit more than the 2,626 people living there now. In all, the $21.6 million in works already in place will, when added to the works planned for the future, accommodate a build-out population in Promontory of 7,500.
Section 3.2 of the report details the capital costs associated with the future development models, including the amount that the City is planning to spend on additional infrastructure in Promontory in the years ahead. It is important to consider these future expenditures in conjunction with the $21.6 million spent to date, and to determine, on a per capita basis, how much of the total works would have been needed to service the present 2,626 population. This need to pro rate expenditures for the existing population is explored in the sub-sections that follow.
• Focus on Differences ( In the comparisons of the two past models, the focus is on the differences in assessment bases and capital costs. Assessment and cost figures that are common to both models are not included in the study.
1. Water
This section presents the key differences in off-site water capital costs associated with the two past development models. Model 1a focuses on the cost to service Promontory, while Model 1b focuses on the cost to service Prest Road (the cost to service other, common, areas are not explored). Capital cost figures for Promontory were supplied by the City's Development Engineer; capital costs for Prest Road were developed by Urban Systems.
1. Model 1a: Chilliwack Today
Since 1992, the City has spent a total of $4.5 million (2000 dollars) on off-site water infrastructure in Promontory. Future expenditures on waterworks in Promontory (see section 3.2.1.1) are unnecessary ( the works added between 1992 and 1999 are sufficient to accommodate the entire build-out population of 7,500. On a per capita basis, this amount translates into $1,575,600 in water capital costs for the 2,626 people currently living in Promontory.
Value
The value, in 2000 dollars, of past off-site water capital expenditures related specifically to Promontory under Model 1a is:
$1,575,600.
2. Model 1b: Valley Focus (past)
Urban Systems' engineers reviewed the additional off-site water infrastructure needs of the 2,626 people along Prest Road and determined that this entire population could have been accommodated by the City's existing system. Put differently, no additional off-site waterworks would have been required to accommodate the Prest Road development under this model.
Value
The value, in 2000 dollars, of past off-site water capital expenditures related specifically to Prest Road under Model 1b is:
$0.
2. Sewer
This section presents the key differences in off-site sewer capital costs associated with the two past development models. Model 1a focuses on the cost to service Promontory, while Model 1b focuses on the cost to service Prest Road. Capital cost figures for Promontory were supplied by the City's Development Engineer; capital costs for Prest Road were developed by Urban Systems.
1. Model 1a: Chilliwack Today
Since 1992, the City has spent a total of $655,000 (2000 dollars) on off-site sewer infrastructure in Promontory. Future expenditures on sewer works in Promontory (see section 3.2.2.1) are expected to total $7.57 million, which has a net present value of $4.87 million. Adding $655,000 to $4.87 million brings the total to $5,525,000 in off-site sewer infrastructure expenditures for a build-out population of 7,500. On a per capita basis, this amount translates into $1.93 million for the 2,626 people currently living there. This amount, which is higher than the $655,000 spent to date, suggests that Promontory's future population will reach a size at which a higher level of sewer service is required. At the present smaller population of 2,626, the $655,000 of sewer works provides adequate coverage. $655,000 is the figure, therefore, that is used in the study.
Value
The value, in 2000 dollars, of past off-site sewer capital expenditures related specifically to Promontory under Model 1a is:
$655,000.
2. Model 1b: Valley Focus (past)
Urban Systems' engineers reviewed the off-site sewer infrastructure needs of the population along Prest Road. Unlike the situation with waterworks, the need for new sewer infrastructure would have been great. In all, new works required would have included:
- a new lift station and force main ($1,040,000)
- upgrades to the existing lift station no. 2 ($500,000)
- upgrades to an existing force main for lift station no. 2 ($960,000)
- new gravity mains ($1,080,000)
- upgrades to existing gravity mains ($1,000,000)
In total, the cost in 2000 dollars for these works would have been $4,580,000.
Value
The value, in 2000 dollars, of past off-site sewer capital expenditures related specifically to Prest Road under Model 1b is:
$4,580,000.
3. Drainage
This section presents the key differences in drainage capital costs associated with Models 1a and 1b. Model 1a focuses on the cost to service Promontory, while Model 1b focuses on the cost to service Prest Road. Capital cost figures for Promontory were supplied by the City's Development Engineer; capital costs for Prest Road were developed by Urban Systems.
1. Model 1a: Chilliwack Today
Since 1992, the City has spent a total of $773,400 (2000 dollars) on off-site drainage in Promontory. Future expenditures on drainage (see section 3.2.3.1) are expected to total $2.0 million, which has a net present value of $1.9 million. Adding $773,400 to $1.9 million brings the total to $2.67 million in off-site drainage expenditures for a build-out population of 7,500. On a per capita basis, this amount translates into $936,000 for the 2,626 people currently living there. This amount, which is higher than the $773,400 spent to date, indicates that Promontory's future population will reach a size at which a higher level of drainage is required. At the present smaller population of 2,626, the $773,400 of drainage provides adequate coverage. $773,400 is the figure, therefore, that is used in the study.
Value
The value, in 2000 dollars, of past off-site drainage capital expenditures related specifically to Promontory under Model 1a is:
$773,400.
2.2.3.2 Model 1b: Valley Focus (past)
Urban Systems' engineers reviewed the additional off-site drainage needs of the 2,626 people along Prest Road and determined that the City's existing system would have been adequate to accommodate the entire new population. Put differently, no additional off-site drainage would have been required for the Prest Road development under this model.
Value
The value, in 2000 dollars, of past off-site drainage capital expenditures related specifically to Prest Road under Model 1b is:
$0.
4. Roads
This section presents the key differences in roads capital costs under the two past development models. Model 1a focuses on the cost to service Promontory, while Model 1b focuses on the cost to service Prest Road. Capital cost figures for Promontory were supplied by the City's Development Engineer; capital costs for Prest Road were developed by Urban Systems.
1. Model 1a: Chilliwack Today
Since 1992, the City has spent a total of $14.4 million (2000 dollars) on new roads in Promontory. Future off-site expenditures on roads (see section 3.2.4.1) are expected to total $13.9 million, which has a net present value of $7.74 million. Adding $14.4 million to $7.74 million brings the total to $22.14 million in off-site road expenditures for a build-out population of 7,500. On a per capita basis, this amount translates into $7,752,000 for the 2,626 people currently living there.
Value
The value of past off-site road capital expenditures, and past off- and on-site road maintenance expenditures, related specifically to Promontory under Model 1a is:
$7,752,000.
2. Model 1b: Valley Focus (past)
Urban Systems' engineers estimate that a total of $2.95 million worth of off-site road works would have been required for development along Prest Road. These improvements would have been made to Prest Road itself, and would have included the addition of a new section ($1.8 million), the widening of existing sections ($650,000) and two intersection improvements ($500,000).
Value
The value of past off-site road capital expenditures, and past off- and on-site road maintenance expenditures, related specifically to the Prest Road area under Model 1b is:
$2,950,000.
5. Parks, Recreation and Libraries
This section considers the differences in costs associated with parks, recreation and libraries in the two past development models. The figures presented here were taken from information provided by the City's Development Engineer and through interviews with the Director of Parks and Recreation.
1. Model 1a: Chilliwack Today
Consider the following points on parks, recreation and libraries:
➢ Parks ( Since 1992, the City has spent a total of $1.28 million (2000 dollars) on the acquisition and development of both active (e.g., sportsfield) and passive parklands in Promontory. Future expenditures on parkland in Promontory (see section 3.2.5.1) are estimated to total $1.8 million, which has a net present value of $1.41 million. Adding $1.28 million to $1.41 million brings the total to $2.69 million for park acquisition and development for a total build-out population of 7,500. On a per capita basis, this amount translates into $942,000 in park capital costs for the 2,626 people currently living in Promontory.
➢ Recreation ( No recreation facility expenditures have been made specifically to service the population in Promontory. Promontory's residents use facilities in the valley area.
➢ Libraries ( No library expenditures have been made specifically to service Promontory. Promontory's residents use the library facilities in the valley area.
Value
The value, in 2000 dollars, of the parks, recreation and libraries expenditures specific to Promontory in Model 1a is:
$942,000.
2. Model 1b: Valley Focus (past)
Consider the following points on parks, recreation and libraries for Model 1b:
➢ Parks ( Based on future estimates of capital expenditures in valley greenfield sites, it is assumed that approximately $240,000 in 2000 dollars would have been spent on parkland acquisition and development to service the greenfield area along Prest Road. This number, compared to the figure used in Promontory, is quite low for two reasons. The first reason relates to economies of scale. The greenfield development along Prest Road is contiguous to the existing urban area of Chilliwack Proper. The park facilities in place in Chilliwack Proper are easily accessible not only to residents of Chilliwack Proper, but also to the residents along Prest Road. Large expenditures on new, additional park facilities specifically for Prest Road would not have been required.
The second reason relates to topography. In flat valley areas, the ratio of usable park space to land acquired is very high. For example, a 0.5 ha park in a flat area could be developed from a 0.5 ha parcel of land (ratio of 1:1). In sloping, upland areas such as Promontory, the ratio is much lower. 0.5 ha of usable park in Promontory may require the purchase of 1.0 ha of land (ratio of 1:2). Overall, acquisition costs are much lower in flat, valley areas.
➢ Recreation ( No recreation facility expenditures would have been made specifically to service the population along Prest Road.
➢ Libraries ( No libraries expenditures would have been made specifically to service the population along Prest Road.
Value
The value, in 2000 dollars, of the parks, recreation and libraries expenditures specific to Prest Road in Model 1b is:
$240,000.
6. Fire Department
There are no differences in fire department capital costs in the two past development models. The population in Promontory has been served, as the population along Prest Road would have been served, by existing fire halls in Sardis and Chilliwack Proper respectively.
7. Other
R.C.M.P. and urban transit were briefly considered as part of the examination into the ALC's past economic impact. The costs associated with each of these functions would have been the same under both past models.
2.3 Differences in Non-residential Assessment
As was noted in section 2.1.2, a number of potential commercial and industrial ventures have been turned away from Chilliwack in recent years, in many cases because of the inability, or perceived inability, to access valley lands in the ALR. Model 1b assumes that at least some of the potential ventures would have received access to the required lands, and would have come to fruition.
2.3.1 Past Economic Development Opportunities
A list of past opportunities was provided by the City's Director of Development. This list, while not definitive, does identify many of the larger, more important ventures that considered locating in Chilliwack at some point between 1992 and 1999. The complete list is reproduced in Table 2.3.1a.
Table 2.3.1a
Past Economic Development Opportunities
|Venture |Year |Total Size |
|Computer Chip Manufacturer |1996 |8 ha |
|Bottled Water Operation |1998 |8 ha |
|Motor Sports Facility |1992 |80 ha |
|Heavy Equipment Manufacturing |1998 |20 ha |
|Campground Development |1992 |18 ha |
|Recycling Operations (2) |1998 |8 ha each |
|Mushroom Operation |1998 |12 ha |
|Hog Processing |1996 |8 ha |
|Feed Mill Operations (2) |1996 |4 ha; 8 ha |
|Titanium Production |1996 |16 ha |
|Semi-conductor Plant |1995 |32 ha |
|Aluminum Plant |1997 |40 ha |
|Lumber Manufacturing |1999 |20 ha |
|Vehicle Rim Manufacturing |1996 |4 ha |
|Co-generation Plant |1995 |48 ha |
|Silicate Chip Manufacturing |1997 |12 ha |
|Prefam Housing |1997 |4 ha |
|Quartz Manufacturing |1998 |6 ha |
|Travel Centre |1994 |16 ha |
|Golf Course |1992 |50 ha |
Map 1 shows the approximate proposed locations of the various enterprises. Note that in certain cases, individual ventures were considering more than one location. The map attempts to identify all locations that were under review.
It is important to note that each economic development opportunity identified here required some exclusion of land from the ALR in order to proceed. In some of the cases, the ALC was approached either formally or informally and asked for cooperation. In other cases, the ALC was not approached, but the proponents passed Chilliwack over once they realized that land exclusions were required. In each case, City staff report, it is accurate to say that the failure to bring the opportunity to fruition was closely tied to the inability, or perceived inability, to access the necessary lands in the ALR.
2. Assessed Values of Past Opportunities
In order to gauge the economic impact related to the loss of these opportunities, it is first necessary to determine their assessed values. This section reviews the methodology used to determine these values. A spreadsheet showing the complete calculations and values used is provided in Appendix 1. The following points summarize the approach taken:
➢ Land Value ( Land value is one important element of a project's assessed value. Average land values of $60 per m2 for industrial land, and $100 per m2 for commercial land were assumed for the various ventures. These assumptions were based on an examination of existing commercial and industrial ventures, a review of vacant lands presently available and discussions with a local real estate appraiser.
➢ Finished Construction Costs ( Finished construction costs, which include a factor for the cost of machinery and equipment, is another key element of assessed value. Current finished construction costs in the Chilliwack area were reviewed to help select figures of $1,000 per m2 for commercial construction, $1,100 per m2 for lower order industrial construction and $1,600 per m2 for higher order industrial development.
These two key elements – land value and finished construction costs – were combined to generate conservative estimates of assessed values. These estimates were reviewed by the City's Director of Development, and compared to the values of similar developments in other municipalities. The final estimates of assessed values are displayed in table 2.3.2a.
Table 2.3.2a
Estimated Assessed Values
|Venture |Year |Assessed Value |
|Computer Chip Manufacturer |1996 |$17.8 million |
|Bottled Water Operation |1998 |$13.8 million |
|Motor Sports Facility |1992 |$30.0 million |
|Heavy Equipment Manufacturing |1998 |$44.5 million |
|Campground Development |1992 |$7.5 million |
|Recycling Operations (2) |1998 |$13.8 million ea |
|Mushroom Operation |1998 |$10.0 million |
|Hog Processing |1996 |$9.0 million |
|Feed Mill Operations (2) |1996 |$4.5 m; $9.0 m |
|Titanium Production |1996 |$35.6 million |
|Semi-conductor Plant |1995 |$71.2 million |
|Aluminum Plant |1997 |$89.1 million |
|Lumber Manufacturing |1999 |$60.0 million |
|Vehicle Rim Manufacturing |1996 |$8.9 million |
|Co-generation Plant |1995 |$37.0 million |
|Silicate Chip Manufacturing |1997 |$26.7 million |
|Prefam Housing |1997 |$6.9 million |
|Quartz Manufacturing |1998 |$13.4 million |
|Travel Centre |1994 |$42.1 million |
|Golf Course |1992 |$10.0 million |
3. Property Tax Revenues
As illustrated in Map 1, several of the past economic development opportunities targeted the same general tract of land. In such cases, it is assumed that only one opportunity would have actually been able to use the land, and pay property tax for the use of that land to the City. In order to determine the property tax revenues that would have been generated by the past opportunities, it is necessary to review the actual dates of the ventures and identify which ones would have been the first to develop the specific sites.
The exercise of identifying these ventures cancels out certain other ventures and leaves a shortened list. This shortened list is presented in Table 2.3.3a.
Table 2.3.3a
List of Past Opportunities for Tax Purposes
|Venture |Year |Assessed Value |
|Bottled Water Operation |1998 |$13.8 million |
|Motor Sports Facility |1992 |$30.0 million |
|Campground Development |1992 |$7.5 million |
|Mushroom Operation |1998 |$10.0 million |
|Titanium Production |1996 |$35.6 million |
|Semi-conductor Plant |1995 |$71.2 million |
|Aluminum Plant |1997 |$89.1 million |
|Co-generation Plant |1995 |$47.0 million |
|Travel Centre |1994 |$42.1 million |
|Golf Course |1992 |$10.0 million |
Table 2.3.3a represents the list to be used in determining the amount of property tax revenue that the City would have collected from 1992 to 1999 had the economic development opportunities been able to proceed.
The spreadsheet in Appendix 1 plots the individual ventures against the appropriate tax rates from the specific past years. The spreadsheet reveals that, in total, the City would have collected $16,588,497 (2000 dollars) in property tax revenues from these developments. $16,588,497 represents the amount of forgone revenue under Model 1a.
2.4 Conclusion
Table 2.4.1 summarizes the cost and forgone revenue figures listed for Models 1a and 1b.
Table 2.4.1
Summary of Costs and Forgone Revenues for Each Model
|Costs and |Model 1a: |Model 1b: |
|Forgone Revenues |Chilliwack Today |Valley Focus (past) |
|Costs | | |
| |Water |1,576,000 |0 |
| |Sewer |655,000 |4,580,000 |
| |Drainage |773,400 |0 |
| |Roads |7,752,000 |2,950,000 |
| |Parks, Recreation, Libraries |942,000 |240,000 |
| |Fire Department |0 |0 |
| |Other |0 |0 |
|Sub-total |$ 11,698,400 |$ 7,770,000 |
| | | | |
|Forgone Revenues | | |
| |Past Development |16,588,497 |0 |
| |Opportunities | | |
|Sub-total |$ 16,588,497 |$ 0 |
| | | | |
|Total |$ 28,286,897 |$ 7,770,000 |
Table 2.4.1 shows that the combination of additional capital costs and forgone property tax revenues totals $28,286,897 for Model 1a, and $7,770,000 for Model 1b. Subtracting Model 1b's total from that of Model 1a gives the estimate of the ALC's past economic impact as $20,516,897.
3. Economic Impact ( Future
3.1 Models of Development
Three models of development were created for use in determining the future economic impact of the ALC on the municipality. Each model is designed to accommodate a population of 134,000, which is the build-out population target identified for Chilliwack in the Fraser Valley Regional District's (FVRD) Regional Growth Strategy. It is anticipated that this 134,000 population will be reached in each case around the year 2020. For the purpose of simplicity, it is assumed that population growth will occur in a linear fashion.
This section of the report outlines the key characteristics of each model.
1. Model 2a: New OCP with Upland Expansion (future)
Model 2a is depicted in figure 3. This model, which represents Chilliwack as it is intended to develop under the 1999 OCP, is built around the ALC's refusal to allow future development on ALR lands in the valley. The following points describe Model 2a in detail:
➢ Residential Growth ( The 1999 OCP identifies a short-term development strategy to a population of 85,000. This short-term strategy assumes:
- further densification of Chilliwack Proper to 40,000
- continued development of selected uplands
- limited population absorption across the municipality
Table 3.1.1a illustrates how the increase in population to 85,000 will be accommodated.
Table 3.1.1a
Accommodation of Population to 85,000
| |Current Population |Projected Population |
|Region within Chilliwack | | |
|Chilliwack Proper |31,434 |39,885 |
|Sardis-Vedder |18,130 |20,479 |
|Promontory |2,626 |4,388 |
|Chilliwack Mountain |1,029 |1,820 |
|Ryder Lake |797 |960 |
|Eastern Hillsides |511 |3,598 |
|Other Rural |7,417 |8,039 |
|Non-Private Households |1,498 |2,668 |
|First Nations Reserve Population |1,800 |3,163 |
|Total |65,242 |85,000 |
As noted earlier, the FVRD's Regional Growth Strategy requires Chilliwack to plan for an ultimate build-out of 134,000. Model 2a, therefore, needs to be expanded to accommodate the increase from 85,000 to 134,000.
During the development of the new OCP, the ALC rejected three separate Future Plan Committee proposals to release select valley ALR lands for future residential development. Model 2a, therefore, assumes that Chilliwack's growth from 85,000 to 134,000 would be accommodated through the increased densification and infill of existing urban regions, and the urbanization of upland areas, including Ryder Lake. Ryder Lake is expected to accommodate a population of 25,000 under this model. The West Village of the Ryder Lake Development Area and a portion of the East Village would provide sufficient capacity for this population (see District of Chilliwack: Ryder Lake Area Plan, April 10, 1996).
Table 3.1.1b shows how the increase to 134,000 would be accommodated under Model 2a.
Table 3.1.1b
Accommodation of Population to 134,000
| |Current Population |Projected Population |
|Region within Chilliwack | | |
|Chilliwack Proper |31,434 |50,000 |
|Sardis-Vedder |18,130 |23,000 |
|Promontory |2,626 |7,000 |
|Chilliwack Mountain |1,029 |3,000 |
|Ryder Lake |797 |25,000 |
|Eastern Hillsides |511 |13,500 |
|Other Rural |7,417 |9,278 |
|Non-Private Households |1,498 |3,222 |
|First Nations Reserve Population |1,800 |* |
|Total |65,242 |134,000 |
* Note that the OCP does not include a future First Nations Reserve population figure.
It is assumed that First Nations will determine their own population projections.
➢ Order of Build-out ( The densification and/or urbanization of Chilliwack Proper, Sardis-Vedder, Promontory, Chilliwack Mountain and Eastern Hillsides are expected to occur in tandem. The development of Ryder Lake, it is assumed, would not begin until 2009.
➢ Economic Development ( In addition to residential growth, it is important to consider future commercial and industrial development. Economic development projections made by the Future Plan Committee suggest that close to 10 hectares of new land per year will be required to satisfy the future demands of industry and business. This annual requirement translates into a total demand of slightly over 200 hectares during the study period (i.e., 21 years, to year 2020). To comfortably provide for this need, the Future Plan Committee called for a total dedication of 259 hectares of new economic development lands. All of the lands identified by the Future Plan Committee are presently within the ALR.
The provision of these new lands is problematic under Model 2a. Most businesses and industries need to locate on flat valley lands, near to the Trans Canada Highway. The ALC has made clear, however, that it will not release such lands for economic development purposes. The former CFB Chilliwack could, conceivably, provide a significant portion of the total amount required; however, it is far from certain that the CFB Chilliwack site would be available for City use. Moreover, only a portion of the site may be suitable for economic development purposes. CFB Chilliwack, therefore, cannot be counted on as an economic development land base in this model. The development of Ryder Lake would supply approximately 40 hectares, or four years' worth, of the total need. These lands, however, are not appropriately situated given their remote location, especially in relation to the Trans Canada. Finally, Chilliwack's current inventory of available industrial lands is restricted to small parcels, most of which are unusable for sizable operations.
In all, Chilliwack's ability to provide sufficient new lands for economic is severely limited under Model 2a.
2. Model 2b: Valley Focus (future)
Model 2b is illustrated in figure 4. This model accommodates all future growth on the valley floor, within a rational urban containment boundary. In essence, the model represents one plausible future development scenario that Chilliwack could pursue if the ALC were willing to release select ALR lands for future valley development. The following points describe the model in detail:
➢ Residential Growth ( The vast majority of future residential growth would be accommodated through the densification of existing valley urban areas, and through the development of select ALR valley lands. ALR lands were reviewed for future development potential based on key planning criteria. These criteria specify that future development parcels should be:
- isolated by main roads, rivers or other features, from larger tracts of agricultural land in production
- lower quality in terms of agricultural capability (e.g., Class 4)
- adjacent to existing urban development
In accordance with these criteria, a number of ALR valley parcels were selected for future residential growth. These parcels, which are identified in figure 4, are listed in table 3.1.2a along with their average development densities and expected build-out populations.
Table 3.1.2a
ALR Valley Parcels for Future Residential Growth
| |Development Density |Build-out |
|Parcel | |Population |
|Prest Road (76 ha)* |12 units/ha |2,626 |
|Prest Road (142 ha) |30 units/ha |11,374 |
|Webster Property (30 ha) |30 units/ha |1,300 |
|NE Sardis-Vedder (82 ha) |30 units/ha |6,000 |
|Higginson (76 ha) |37 units/ha |7,000 |
|Evans Road (74 ha) |30 units/ha |5,500 |
|CFB Chilliwack (146 ha) |30 units/ha |10,000 |
* Note that this 76 ha parcel was identified in Model 1b (see figure 2).
Table 3.1.2b combines the ALR valley land parcels with the existing urban areas to show how, through new development and densification, the municipality would reach its ultimate build-out of 134,000.
Table 3.1.2b
Accommodation of 134,000 Population
| |Current Population (Model |Projected Population|
|Region within Chilliwack |1b) | |
|Chilliwack Proper |31,434 |50,000 |
|Sardis-Vedder |18,130 |23,000 |
|Chilliwack Mountain |1,029 |3,000 |
|Ryder Lake |797 |950 |
|Eastern Hillsides |511 |750 |
|Other Rural |7,417 |9,278 |
|Non-Private Households |1,498 |3,222 |
|First Nations Reserve Population |1,800 |* |
|Prest Road |2,626 |14,000 |
|Webster Property | |1,300 |
|NE Sardis-Vedder | |6,000 |
|Higginson Property | |7,000 |
|Evans Road | |5,500 |
|CFB Chilliwack | |10,000 |
|Total |65,242 |134,000 |
* First Nations will determine their own population projections.
Note that the "current population" column in table 3.1.2b reflects the build-out population of Model 1b, which includes 2,626 people in the 76 hectare parcel along Prest Road. It is important to recall that Model 1b replaced the upland development of Promontory with the 76 hectare valley development. Model 2b builds on Model 1b, and therefore continues the assumption that Promontory is not a development area.
➢ Order of Build-out ( The order of build-out under Model 2b would be as follows: Prest Road, Evans Road, Webster Property, CFB Chilliwack, NE Sardis-Vedder and the Higginson Property.
➢ Economic Development ( As noted earlier, the Future Plan Committee identified, as part of its proceedings, 259 hectares of valley ALR land required to comfortably satisfy the long-term demand for business / industrial park development. These lands are included in Model 2b and identified in figure 4.
3. Model 2c: Favoured Direction (future)
Model 2c is illustrated in figure 5. During the Future Plan process, the Future Plan Committee developed a favoured direction for long-term development. This favoured direction, which emerged through extensive public consultation, called for the densification of existing urban areas, the development of select ALR valley lands and the continued urbanization of specific upland areas. The following points describe the model in detail:
➢ Residential Growth ( The favoured direction created by the Future Plan Committee assumed the significant densification of Chilliwack Proper, Sardis-Vedder, Chilliwack Mountain and Promontory over the life of the plan (i.e., to 2020). Subsequent assessments of the Committee's work, however, suggest that the population targets set for these areas were too optimistic. New, more realistic targets have been set for use in Model 2c. Both the original targets and the new, more realistic targets are presented in table 3.1.3a.
Table 3.1.3a
Population Targets for Existing Urban Areas
| |Committee |New Target (Model 2c) |
|Existing Urban Area |Target | |
|Chilliwack Proper |62,415 |50,000 |
|Sardis-Vedder |23,000 |23,000 |
|Chilliwack Mountain |4,500 |3,000 |
|Promontory |10,500 |7,000 |
In addition to densification, the favoured direction called for the release of select ALR lands for future valley development. Specifically, the favoured direction counted on the release of a 142 hectare parcel of land along Prest Road. At the proposed density of 37 units per hectare, this 142 parcel would accommodate 14,000 people.
The favoured direction also called for the continued urbanization of specific upland regions, namely Eastern Hillsides. A total population of 13,500 was projected for this area.
Model 2c, like all of the future models of development, needs to be able to accommodate a build-out population of 134,000. In order satisfy this condition, it is necessary to modify the favoured direction further by including the Western and Eastern Neighbourhood Centres of the West Village development in Ryder Lake.
Table 3.1.3b shows how Model 2c would accommodate the entire 134,000 build-out population.
Table 3.1.3b
Accommodation of 134,000 Population
| |Current Population |Projected Population |
|Region within Chilliwack | | |
|Chilliwack Proper |31,434 |50,000 |
|Sardis-Vedder |18,130 |23,000 |
|Promontory |2,626 |7,000 |
|Chilliwack Mountain |1,029 |3,000 |
|Prest Road (142 ha) | |14,000 |
|Eastern Hillsides |511 |13,500 |
|Ryder Lake |797 |11,000 |
|Other Rural |7,417 |9,278 |
|Non-Private Households |1,498 |3,222 |
|First Nations Reserve Population |1,800 |* |
|Total |65,242 |134,000 |
* First Nations will determine their own population projections.
➢ Order of Build-out ( The densification and continued development of Chilliwack Proper, Sardis-Vedder, Chilliwack Mountain and Promontory would occur in tandem with expansion into Eastern Hillsides. The development of Prest Road would occur after these areas. Expansion into Ryder Lake would come later, perhaps in or after 2014.
➢ Economic Development ( The Future Plan Committee identified, as part of its proceedings, 259 hectares of valley ALR land required to satisfy the long-term demand for business / industrial park development. These lands are included in Model 2c and identified in figure 5.
3.2 Differences in Capital Costs
This section of the text explores differences in capital costs associated with the three future models of development. All major services are examined, including water, sewer, drainage, roads, parks and recreation, libraries, fire, police and transit. All costs estimates are given in 2000 dollars, and all figures are charted in the spreadsheets in Appendix 2. The net present values of the future expenditures are listed for each model in the spreadsheets and in the text. In each case, net present value assumes a 5% discount rate.
1. Water
This section reviews the capital costs of off-site waterworks required under the different models. All cost estimates were generated by Urban Systems' engineers, based on a variety of studies including current DCC numbers compiled by the City, the 1996 Ryder Lake Area Plan, the 1996 Chilliwack Mountain Comprehensive Development Plan and the 1994 Eastern Hillsides Comprehensive Development Plan. Cost estimates developed for Model 2b were based on an extensive review of the City's existing systems.
1. Model 2a: New OCP with Upland Expansion (future)
The following points identify the off-site water infrastructure that would be required to service future development under Model 2a:
➢ Chilliwack Proper ( No additional off-site water infrastructure would be required in Chilliwack Proper to service the future population under Model 2a. The City's existing system would have adequate capacity for all future growth.
➢ Sardis-Vedder ( As in Chilliwack Proper, no additional off-site waterworks would be required in Sardis-Vedder for the expected population increase.
➢ Chilliwack Mountain ( A total of $6.43 million in new works would be required for Chilliwack Mountain. These works would be constructed between years 2010 and 2018. Their net present value is $3,291,091.
➢ Promontory ( The $4.5 million of expenditures made between 1992 and 1999 built a water system that is capable of accommodating Promontory's entire build-out population of 7,500. No additional off-site waterworks would be required in the future under this model.
As was noted earlier in section 2.2, it is important to allocate the cost of infrastructure to the population which the infrastructure is designed to accommodate. On a per capita basis, it is determined that $2.92 million of the total $4.5 million would be required to service the expected future growth in Promontory of 4,874 people. This full cost is accounted for in year 2000 in the spreadsheets of Appendix 2, since the expenditure has already been made. The net present value of these works is $2,920,000.
➢ Eastern Hillsides ( The Eastern Hillsides Comprehensive Development Plan identifies a requirement of $23.5 million in off-site waterworks for the future population of Eastern Hillsides. These works would be broken into five stages, in the following amounts:
- stage 1: $10.0 million
- stage 2: $3.3 million
- stage 3: $4.2 million
- stage 4: $2.9 million
- stage 5: $3.1 million
Stage 1 expenditures are scheduled, in the spreadsheets, to begin in 2002. The net present value of the combined expenditures, from stages 1 through 5, is $15,394,510.
➢ Ryder Lake ( The Ryder Lake Area Plan identifies a total off-site waterworks requirement of $29.5 million for the West Village and East Village developments. The West Village works would be constructed in three stages of $7.5 million, $4.1 million and $16.3 million respectively. The East Village would be constructed in one stage only, at a cost of $1.6 million. The net present value of the total expenditures is $15,623,092.
Net present value
As detailed in the Appendix 2 spreadsheets, the net present value of all off-site water expenditures required under Model 2a is:
$37,228,693.
2. Model 2b: Valley Focus (future)
The following points identify the off-site water infrastructure that would be required to service future development under Model 2b:
➢ Chilliwack Proper ( Chilliwack's existing system would have enough capacity for the population increase expected under Model 2b. No additional works would be required.
➢ Sardis-Vedder ( No additional off-site works would be required for the population increase expected Sardis-Vedder under this model. The City's existing system would have adequate capacity.
➢ Chilliwack Mountain ( The $6.43 million in new works identified in Model 2a would also be required under Model 2b. Their net present value is $3,291,091.
➢ Promontory, Eastern Hillsides, Ryder Lake ( Urban development is not considered for these areas under Model 2b.
Net present value
As detailed in the Appendix 2 spreadsheets, the net present value of all future water expenditures required under Model 2b is:
$3,291,091.
3. Model 2c: Favoured Direction (future)
The following points identify the off-site water infrastructure that would be required to service future development under Model 2c:
➢ Chilliwack Proper ( No future expenditures would be required. The existing system would have adequate capacity for future growth under this model.
➢ Sardis-Vedder ( No future expenditures would be required. The existing system would have adequate capacity.
➢ Chilliwack Mountain ( The $6.43 million in new works identified for the other models would be required under Model 2c. The net present value of these works is $3,291,091.
➢ Promontory ( No future expenditures on new off-site water infrastructure would be required. As under Model 2a, however, $2.92 million of the total $4.5 million in past expenditures should be allocated to Promontory's future growth of 4,874 people. This full cost is accounted for in year 2000 in the spreadsheets, since the expenditure has already been made. The net present value of these works is $2,920,000.
➢ Eastern Hillsides ( Off-site water costs for Eastern Hillsides in Model 2c would be the same as those recorded under Model 2a ( $23.5 million over five stages. Stage 1 expenditures would begin in 2002. The net present value of all works is $15,394,510.
➢ Ryder Lake ( Off-site water expenditures for the Western and Eastern Neighbourhood Centres of West Village would be $7.47 million and $4.1 million respectively (total of $11.57 million). These works would accommodate the build-out population of 11,000. In the spreadsheets, the expenditures are scheduled for years 2013 through 2015. The net present value of the works is $5,839,349.
Net present value
As detailed in the Appendix 2 spreadsheets, the net present value of the future water expenditures required under Model 2c is:
$27,444,950.
2. Sewer
This section examines the capital costs of off-site sewer infrastructure required under the different models. All cost estimates were generated by Urban Systems' engineers, based on a variety of studies including current DCC numbers compiled by the City, the 1996 Ryder Lake Area Plan, the 1996 Chilliwack Mountain Comprehensive Development Plan and the 1994 Eastern Hillsides Comprehensive Development Plan. Cost estimates developed for Model 2b were based on an extensive review of the City's existing systems.
3.2.2.1 Model 2a: New OCP with Upland Expansion (future)
The following points identify the off-site sewer infrastructure that would be required to service future development under Model 2a:
➢ Chilliwack Proper ( A total of $7.31 million in off-site sewer infrastructure would be required to service the future growth in Chilliwack Proper under this model. These works would be constructed over years 2000 to 2016. Their net present value is $6,286,132.
➢ Sardis-Vedder ( No future expenditures would be required. The City's existing sewage collection system would have adequate capacity.
➢ Chilliwack Mountain ( $3.18 million in future off-site sewer works would be required for Chilliwack Mountain under Model 2a. These works, which would be added between 2010 and 2018, have a net present value of $1,708,310.
➢ Promontory ( A total of $7.57 million in future off-site sewer expenditures would be required to service the population increase projected for Promontory. These works would be spread among three major projects, slated for years 2004, 2009 and 2012. The net present value of the works is $5,114,609.
➢ Eastern Hillsides ( Total expenditures of $11.59 million would be required for Eastern Hillsides. $6.5 million of these expenditures relate to the major sewer trunk that would be required to link Eastern Hillsides to the City's sewage treatment plant. These costs are scheduled for year 2000. All remaining costs would be spread over years 2002 to 2016. The net present value of all of the works is $9,887,163.
➢ Ryder Lake ( Off-site expenditures for Ryder Lake West Village are estimated at $12.08 million and are scheduled to begin in 2009. Expenditures for East Village are projected at $2.26 million. The net present value of all works is $7,592,684.
Net present value
As detailed in the Appendix 2 spreadsheets, the net present value of all off-site sewer expenditures required under Model 2a is:
$30,588,897.
2. Model 2b: Valley Focus (future)
The following points identify the off-site sewer works that would be required to service future development under Model 2b:
➢ Chilliwack Proper ( A total of $10.47 million in off-site sewer works would be required to accommodate future residential development in Chilliwack Proper. The expenditures would be made between 2000 and 2014. Their net present value is $9,564,756.
➢ Sardis-Vedder ( $7.2 million in off-site sewer works would be needed in the Sardis-Vedder area for the substantial population increase expected under this model. The expenditures, which would be made between 2002 and 2013, have a net present value of $5,218,441.
➢ Chilliwack Mountain ( $4.15 million in sewer works would be needed in the Chilliwack Mountain area. Close to $1 million of these works would be needed to service the business park developments located near the Lickman Interchange. The works would be constructed between 2010 and 2018m. They have a net present value of $2,302,578.
➢ Promontory, Eastern Hillsides, Ryder Lake ( Urban development is not considered for these areas under Model 2b.
Net present value
As detailed in the Appendix 2 spreadsheets, the net present value of all off-site sewer expenditures required under Model 2b is:
$17,085,776.
3. Model 2c: Favoured Direction (future)
The following points identify the off-site sewer works that would be required to service future development under Model 2c:
➢ Chilliwack Proper ( A total of $10.47 million in off-site sewer infrastructure would be required in Chilliwack Proper under this model. These works would be constructed over years 2000 to 2014. Their net present value is $9,564,756.
➢ Sardis-Vedder ( No additional off-site sewer infrastructure would be required in Sardis-Vedder to service the expected future population.
➢ Chilliwack Mountain ( The $4.15 million in sewer works identified in Model 2b would also be needed in the Chilliwack Mountain area under Model 2c. Close to $1 million of these works would be needed to service the business park developments located near the Lickman Interchange. The works would be constructed between 2010 and 2018. Their net present value is $2,302,578.
➢ Promontory ( A total of $7.57 million in future off-site sewer expenditures would be required to service the population increase projected for Promontory. These works would be spread among three major projects, slated for years 2004, 2009 and 2012. The net present value of the works is $5,114,609.
➢ Eastern Hillsides ( The total expenditures of $11.59 million identified under Model 2a would be required for Eastern Hillsides under this model. $6.5 million of these expenditures relate to the major sewer trunk that would be required to link Eastern Hillsides to the City's sewage treatment plant. These costs are scheduled for year 2000. All remaining costs would be spread over years 2002 to 2016. The net present value of all of the works is $9,887,163.
➢ Ryder Lake ( $870,000 in off-site sewer expenditures would be required for the Western Neighbourhood of West Village, and $6.1 million in expenditures would be required for the Eastern Neighbourhood. The total for both neighbourhoods would be $6.97 million. This amount, which would be spent in years 2014 and 2015, has a net present value of $3,373,613.
Net present value
As detailed in the Appendix 2 spreadsheets, the net present value of all off-site sewer expenditures required under Model 2c is:
$30,242,720.
3. Drainage
This section examines the capital costs associated with the off-site drainage infrastructure required under the different models. All cost estimates were generated by Urban Systems' engineers, based on a variety of studies including current DCC numbers compiled by the City, the 1996 Ryder Lake Area Plan, the 1996 Chilliwack Mountain Comprehensive Development Plan and the 1994 Eastern Hillsides Comprehensive Development Plan. Cost estimates developed for Model 2b were based on an extensive review of the City's existing systems.
1. Model 2a: New OCP with Upland Expansion (future)
The following points identify the off-site drainage works that would be required to service future development under Model 2a:
➢ Chilliwack Proper ( No additional off-site drainage would be required in Chilliwack Proper to service the future population under Model 2a. The City's existing system would have adequate capacity for all future growth
➢ Sardis-Vedder ( No additional off-site drainage would be required in Sardis-Vedder to service the expected future population.
➢ Chilliwack Mountain ( An additional trunk sewer and additional culverts would be required for Chilliwack Mountain. These works would cost $2.82 million and would be constructed between 2010 and 2018. Their net present value is $1,488,693.
➢ Promontory ( The only projected future expenditure is a $2.0 million detention pond. As noted in section 2.2.3.1, this entire cost should be allocated to the future population growth. The expenditure would be made in 2001. Its net present value is $1,904,762.
➢ Eastern Hillsides ($2.45 million of off-site drainage works would be required to service the future build-out population of 13,500. These works would be divided into five phases and spread out between 2002 and 2016. Their total net present value is $1,510,096.
➢ Ryder Lake ( A total of $8.14 million in off-site drainage would be required to accommodate the 25,000 population in Ryder Lake. These works would be scheduled for development between 2008 and 2018. Their total net present value is $4,481,627.
Net present value
As detailed in the Appendix 2 spreadsheets, the net present value of all off-site drainage expenditures required under Model 2a is:
$9,385,178.
2. Model 2b: Valley Focus (future)
The following points identify the off-site drainage works that would be required to service future development under Model 2b:
➢ Chilliwack Proper ( No additional off-site drainage would be required in Chilliwack Proper to service the future population or business park development under Model 2b. The City's existing system would have adequate capacity for all future growth.
➢ Sardis-Vedder ( No additional off-site drainage would be required in Sardis-Vedder to service the expected future population.
➢ Chilliwack Mountain ( The additional $2.82 million in trunk and major culverts required in Model 2a would also be required under Model 2b. The net present value of these works is $1,488,693.
➢ Promontory, Eastern Hillsides, Ryder Lake ( Urban development is not considered for these areas under Model 2b.
Net present value
As detailed in the Appendix 2 spreadsheets, the net present value of all off-site drainage expenditures required under Model 2b is:
$1,488,693.
3. Model 2c: Favoured Direction (future)
The following points identify the off-site drainage works that would be required to service future development under Model 2c:
➢ Chilliwack Proper ( No additional off-site drainage would be required in Chilliwack Proper to service the future population or business park development under Model 2c. The City's existing system would have adequate capacity for all future growth.
➢ Sardis-Vedder ( No additional off-site drainage would be required in Sardis-Vedder to service the expected future population.
➢ Chilliwack Mountain ( The additional $2.82 million in trunk and major culverts required in both Models 2a and 2b would be required under Model 2b. The net present value of these works is $1,488,693.
➢ Promontory ( As in Model 2a, the only projected future expenditure under Model 2c is a $2.0 million detention pond. This expenditure, which would be made in 2001, has a net present value of $1,904,762.
➢ Eastern Hillsides ( $2.45 million of off-site drainage works would be required to service the future build-out population of 13,500. These works would be divided into five phases and spread out between 2002 and 2016. Their total net present value is $1,510,096.
➢ Ryder Lake ( Off-site drainage works for the 11,000 people in Ryder Lake would cost a total of $4.75 million. These works, which would be constructed between 2013 and 2017, have a net present value of $2,290,792.
Net present value
As detailed in the Appendix 2 spreadsheets, the net present value of all off-site drainage expenditures required under Model 2c is:
$7,194,343.
4. Roads
This section examines the capital costs of the off-site road construction required under the different models. All cost estimates were generated by Urban Systems' engineers, based on a variety of studies including current DCC numbers compiled by the City, the 1996 Ryder Lake Area Plan, the 1996 Chilliwack Mountain Comprehensive Development Plan and the 1994 Eastern Hillsides Comprehensive Development Plan. Cost estimates developed for Model 2b were based on a review of the City's existing roads network.
1. Model 2a: New OCP with Upland Expansion (future)
The following points identify the off-site road works that would be required to service future development under Model 2a:
➢ Chilliwack Proper ( A total of $58.68 million in road works would be required in Chilliwack Proper under this model. This figure, which would be expended over the entire study period, has a net present value of $43,808,951.
➢ Sardis-Vedder ( Required roads in Sardis-Vedder would total $51.13 million under this model. This figure, to be spent over the entire study period, has a net present value of $36,981,291.
➢ Chilliwack Mountain ( Off-site road expenditures on Chilliwack Mountain would total $8.8 million. The roads would be constructed between 2010 and 2018. Their net present value is $4,650,205.
➢ Promontory ( Future off-site expenditures on roads would include the widening of Promontory Road to four lanes, and the addition of two lanes to Teskey. The total cost of these, and other smaller projects, is estimated at $13.9 million. Some small projects are scheduled to occur in 2007; however, the major projects already noted are not designed to occur until 2010 and 2015 respectively. The net present value of all future works is $8.13 million.
In section 2.2.4.1 it was pointed out that $14.4 million of off-site road works were completed between 1992 and 1999. In order to be consistent, a percentage of these works should be allocated to the future growth that the works were intended to service. $14.64 million of the total past and future off-site road infrastructure is the pro rated amount for the expected 4,874 population growth in Promontory.
The difference between $14.64 million and the net present value of future works ($8.13 million) is $6.51 million. This number is placed in year 2000 in the spreadsheets in Appendix 2 since the expenditure has already been made.
In total, the net present value of all off-site road works allocated to Promontory's future population is $14,635,007.
➢ Eastern Hillsides ( Future off-site road works in Eastern Hillsides are expected to total $30.2 million. These costs, broken into four phases, would be spread over years 2002 through 2018. Their total net present value is $16,578,885.
➢ Ryder Lake ( Future off-site road works in Ryder Lake are estimated at a total of $37.5 million. These costs, which include important improvements to Ryder Lake's access roads, would be spread from 2008 to 2017. The net present value of these works is $19,314,671.
Net present value
As detailed in the Appendix 2 spreadsheets, the net present value of the road expenditures required under Model 2a is:
$135,969,011.
2. Model 2b: Valley Focus (future)
The following points identify the off-site road works that would be required to service future development under Model 2b:
➢ Chilliwack Proper ( New off-site road works in Chilliwack Proper would cost $65.63 million between years 2000 and 2020. The net present value of the total is $48,681,223.
➢ Sardis-Vedder ( Expenditures on new roads in Sardis-Vedder would be significant ( $70.33 million. Their net present value is $46,826,689.
➢ Chilliwack Mountain ( Under Model 2b, Chilliwack Mountain would require the same $8.8 million in road works that was identified for Model 2a. The net present value of this amount is $4,650,205.
➢ Promontory, Eastern Hillsides, Ryder Lake ( Urban development is not considered for these areas under Model 2b.
Net present value
As detailed in the Appendix 2 spreadsheets, the net present value of all off-site road expenditures required under Model 2b is:
$100,158,117.
3. Model 2c: Favoured Direction (future)
The following points identify the off-site road works that would be required to service future development under Model 2c:
➢ Chilliwack Proper ( A total of $65.63 million in off-site road works would be required in Chilliwack Proper under this model. This figure, which would be expended over the entire study period, has a net present value of $48,681,223.
➢ Sardis-Vedder ( Required roads in Sardis-Vedder would total $51.13 million under this model. This figure, to be spent over the entire study period, has a net present value of $36,981,291.
➢ Chilliwack Mountain ( Off-site road expenditures on Chilliwack Mountain would total $8.8 million. The roads would be constructed between 2010 and 2018. Their net present value is $4,650,205.
➢ Promontory ( Future off-site expenditures on roads would include the widening of Promontory Road to four lanes, and the addition of two lanes to Teskey. The total cost of these, and other smaller projects, is estimated at $13.9 million. Some small projects are scheduled to occur in 2007; however, the major projects already noted are not designed to occur until 2010 and 2015 respectively. The net present value of all future works is $8.13 million.
In section 2.2.4.1 it was pointed out that $14.4 million of off-site road works were completed between 1992 and 1999. In order to be consistent, a percentage of these works should be allocated to the future growth that the works were intended to service. $14.64 million of the total past and future off-site road infrastructure is the pro rated amount for the expected 4,874 population growth in Promontory.
The difference between $14.64 million and the net present value of future works ($8.13 million) is $6.51 million. This number is placed in year 2000 in the spreadsheets in Appendix 2 since the expenditure has already been made.
In total, the net present value of all off-site road works allocated to Promontory's future population is $14,635,007.
➢ Eastern Hillsides ( Future off-site road works in Eastern Hillsides are expected to total $30.2 million. These costs, broken into four phases, would be spread over years 2002 through 2018. Their total net present value is $16,578,885.
➢ Ryder Lake ( Future off-site road works in Ryder Lake, for a population of 11,000, would total $16.1 million. These costs, which would be incurred from 2013 through 2017, have a net present value of $7,468,073.
Net present value
As detailed in the Appendix 2 spreadsheets, the net present value of all off-site road works required under Model 2c is:
$128,994,685.
5. Parks, Recreation and Libraries
This section examines the capital costs associated with additional parks, recreation facilities and libraries in each of the future development models. The cost estimates are based on a review of current DCC tables compiled by the City, the Ryder Lake Area Plan prepared by Urban Systems in 1996 and information gathered through interviews with the Director of Parks and Recreation.
A certain amount of parkland acquisition, recreation facility expansion and library development would be required under each model to accommodate growth that is expected to occur through the densification of existing urban areas. For example, DCC projections show that under each model a minimum of $8 million would be needed to acquire and develop new active and passive parkland in the existing urban areas of Chilliwack Proper, Sardis-Vedder and Chilliwack Mountain. In the existing urban valley areas, upgrades to recreation facilities, namely Exhibition Park and, possibly, the Cheam Centre (in the event that the City assumed control over it) would also occur under each model. Finally, each model would see the expansion of the main library branch in Chilliwack Proper, and the development of a second large branch in Sardis-Vedder.
These changes, as noted, would take place under all models and are, therefore, not accounted for under the different options. Only costs over and above those common to all models are identified under the individual scenarios.
3.2.5.1 Model 2a: New OCP with Upland Expansion (future)
The following points outline the parks, recreation facilities and libraries that would be required, over and above what would be needed in all models, to service new development under Model 2a:
Parks
➢ Chilliwack Proper, Sardis-Vedder, Chilliwack Mountain ( No additional expenditures, over and above the $8 million required in all models, would be required under Model 2a.
➢ Promontory ( DCC figures indicate that an additional $1.8 million capital, over and above the $1.28 million spent to date (see section 2.2.5.1), would be spent in the future in Promontory, primarily on passive parklands. In the spreadsheets (Appendix 2), this $1.8 million capital is spread over a six year period, beginning 2005.
As with expenditures for other services, it is important to match the past and future parkland expenditures in Promontory to the populations they were/are designed to benefit. The net present value of the $1.8 million in future expenditures is $1.28 million. This figure and the $1.28 million in past expenditures together equal $2.56 million. On a per capita basis, $1.66 million of this total figure should be allocated to the future population of 4,874.
The difference between $1.66 million and the net present value of future works ($1.28 million) is $380,000. This number is placed in year 2000 in the spreadsheets since the expenditure has already been made.
➢ Eastern Hillsides ( A total of $3.6 million capital would be required to acquire and develop parkland in Eastern Hillsides. This amount would allow for one sportsfield; the bulk of parkland, as in Promontory, would be passive in nature. This figure would be spent over 9 years, beginning 2003.
➢ Ryder Lake ( $10 million capital would be spent on parkland acquisition and development for the 25,000 people expected in Ryder Lake under this model. This amount would be spent in 10 equal increments, beginning 2008.
Given Ryder Lake's relative remoteness, the City would need to spend an additional $500,000 capital on a satellite parks maintenance yard. This amount is scheduled for 2010.
Recreation Facilities
➢ Chilliwack Proper, Sardis-Vedder, Chilliwack Mountain ( No recreation facility costs, over and above the planned upgrades, are associated with this model.
➢ Promontory ( No recreation facilities would be developed as a result of development in Promontory.
➢ Eastern Hillsides ( No major recreation facilities are being planned to service Eastern Hillsides. City staff speculate that a small facility might be provided as part of a community school; however, the facility would be lower order (e.g., fitness room) and quite modest. This possible expenditure is not budgeted for in this analysis.
➢ Ryder Lake ( The Ryder Lake Area Plan calls for an $18 million recreation centre to be built in the development. This figure recognizes that, at a build-out of 25,000 people, Ryder Lake would be a substantial community in its own right that, on account of its remoteness, would require a relatively high level of recreation services. An expenditure of $18 million would build a centre that included a gym, a pool, two rinks and fitness/community rooms.
Libraries
➢ Chilliwack Proper, Sardis-Vedder, Chilliwack Mountain ( No library expenditures would be required, over and above what would be needed in all models, to accommodate the valley population under Model 2a.
➢ Promontory ( No library facilities would be developed specifically to service Promontory.
➢ Eastern Hillsides ( No library facilities would be developed specifically to service Eastern Hillsides.
➢ Ryder Lake ( The Ryder Lake Area Plan budgets $2 million for a library in the development. This cost would be spread over two years, beginning in 2012.
Net present value
The net present value of the listed parks, recreation and library expenditures required under Model 2a is:
$21,159,006.
3.2.5.2 Model 2b: Valley Focus (future)
The following points outline the parks, recreation facilities and libraries that would be required, over and above what would be needed in all models, to service new development under Model 2b:
Parks
➢ Chilliwack Proper, Sardis-Vedder, Chilliwack Mountain ( Under this model, a total of $4 million capital, over and above the $8 million common to all models, would be spent to acquire and develop parkland to service the greenfield valley areas. The additional $4 million would be spread equally over 12 years, beginning 2000. This extra amount would allow the City to add some new active sites, and add value to passive sites.
➢ Promontory, Eastern Hillsides, Ryder Lake ( Urban development is not considered for these areas under Model 2b.
Recreation Facilities
➢ Chilliwack Proper, Sardis-Vedder, Chilliwack Mountain ( It was noted earlier that all three future development models would require the City to make certain expansions to the existing recreation facilities in the valley, including the Cheam Centre (should the City assume control over it). The larger valley population under Model 2b would require the City to make additional expansions, over and above those common to all models, to these facilities. City staff estimate additional expansions in the order of $6 million, beginning in 2011.
➢ Promontory, Eastern Hillsides, Ryder Lake ( Urban development is not considered for these areas under Model 2b.
Libraries
➢ Chilliwack Proper, Sardis-Vedder, Chilliwack Mountain ( The library expansion plans, common to all models, would be sufficient to service the larger valley population under Model 2b.
➢ Promontory, Eastern Hillsides, Ryder Lake ( Urban development is not considered for these areas under Model 2b.
Net present value
The net present value of the listed parks, recreation and library expenditures required under Model 2b is:
$6,445,814.
3.2.5.3 Model 2c: Favoured Direction (future)
The following points outline the parks, recreation facilities and libraries that would be required, over and above what would be needed in all models, to service new development under Model 2c:
Parks
➢ Chilliwack Proper, Sardis-Vedder, Chilliwack Mountain ( An extra $4 million capital, over and above the $8 million required for all models, is called for under Model 2b to service the new populations in the various greenfield sites. The estimated extra capital cost for parkland to accommodate the smaller greenfield populations in Model 2c is $1.3 million. This figure is broken down in the spreadsheets from 2000 to 2009.
➢ Promontory ( The forecasted development of Promontory under Model 2c is the same as that under Model 2a. As such, Model 2a's estimate of $1.66 million capital (net present value) for Promontory's future population would also be required under Model 2c. This figure includes $380,000 in expenditures that were made before 2000 on parkland intended to benefit the future population.
➢ Eastern Hillsides ( The $3.6 million capital listed for Eastern Hillsides under Model 2a would also be required under Model 2c, since both models forecast the same future population for the area. As in Model 2a, the $3.6 million in Model 2c would be spent over 9 years, beginning 2003.
➢ Ryder Lake ( At 11,000 people (the population forecasted for Ryder Lake under Model 2c) the City would need to spend approximately $3 million capital on parkland acquisition and development. On a per capita basis, this amount is less than the estimated expenditure under Model 2a ($10 million) because, at 11,000, Ryder Lake would not constitute a stand-alone community in need of a higher level of urban services. This $3 million would be spent in 3 equal increments, beginning 2013.
Given Ryder Lake's relative remoteness, the City would need to spend an additional $500,000 capital on a satellite parks maintenance yard, as in Model 2a. This amount would be spent in 2014.
Recreation Facilities
➢ Chilliwack Proper, Sardis-Vedder, Chilliwack Mountain ( Earlier it was noted that expansions to existing facilities in the order of $6 million, over and above what would be required under all models, would be needed to accommodate the larger valley population in Model 2b. City staff estimate that half of this extra amount ($3 million) would be needed for additional expansions to accommodate the valley population in Model 2c. These costs are assumed to begin in 2011.
➢ Promontory ( No recreation facilities would be developed as a result of development in Promontory.
➢ Eastern Hillsides ( As under Model 2a, no major recreation facilities are planned to service Eastern Hillsides in Model 2c. A small facility might be possible as part of a community school; however, the facility would be lower order (e.g., fitness room) and quite modest. This possible expenditure is not budgeted for in this analysis.
➢ Ryder Lake ( Given Ryder Lake's remoteness, City staff believe that some recreation facility might be justified, even at 11,000 people. Staff suggest that developing a recreation facility as part of a multi-use community school – a model presently being pursued in other areas of Chilliwack – would make most sense. Such a facility could contain an expanded gymnasium, an ice rink, a leisure pool and multi-purpose rooms. The estimated capital cost is $8 million. This cost would be spent from 2014 to 2017.
Libraries
➢ Chilliwack Proper, Sardis-Vedder, Chilliwack Mountain ( There would be no capital costs, over an above what would be required under all models.
➢ Promontory ( No library facilities would be developed specifically to service Promontory.
➢ Eastern Hillsides ( No library facilities would be developed specifically to service Eastern Hillsides.
➢ Ryder Lake ( For a build-out of 11,000, Ryder Lake would likely require a small satellite library with limited inventory and hours (similar to the existing Yarrow Branch). If incorporated with the community school (see recreation) the capital cost would be approximately $500,000.
Net present value
The net present value of the listed parks, recreation and library expenditures required under Model 2c is:
$12,867,977.
6. Fire Department
Capital cost estimates for the different development models were determined during interviews with the City's Fire Chief.
As expected, there would be a number of service upgrades and expansions common to all models. For example, in all models, the Department would consolidate halls 1 and 6 and construct a new hall in Chilliwack Proper to better serve the Downtown Area. The Chief also believes that, under all models, a satellite hall might be required on Fairfield Island to provide adequate future service to a residents in the north end of the City.
These changes, common to all models, are not accounted for under the individual scenarios.
3.2.6.1 Model 2a: New OCP with Upland Expansion (future)
The following points identify the fire department expenditures that would be required, over and above what would be needed in all models, to service new development under Model 2a:
➢ Chilliwack Proper, Sardis-Vedder, Chilliwack Mountain ( There would be no specific expenditures, over and above what would be required for all models, under this scenario.
➢ Promontory ( Promontory is serviced by the new Sardis Hall. No additional expenditures would be required under this model.
➢ Eastern Hillsides ( A new hall would be required at the base of Eastern Hillsides on Annis Road. The capital cost of the hall would be $1.5 million, plus the $500,000 on land already spent. The costs for the hall are factored, in the spreadsheets, to begin in 2004. Their net present value is $1,704,671.
➢ Ryder Lake ( The existing rural hall in Ryder Lake would need to be relocated to the Village Centre, at a capital cost of $2 million. An additional truck would likely be required at $500,000.
Unlike hard services, fire departments would be built as development occurs, rather than in anticipation of it. Therefore, it is assumed that the development of the Ryder Lake Hall would not take place until 2012. The net present value of the hall and truck is $1,352,319.
Net present value
The net present value of the listed fire department expenditures required under Model 2a is:
$3,056,991.
2. Model 2b: Valley Focus (future)
The following points identify the fire department expenditures that would be required, over and above what would be needed in all models, to service new development under Model 2b:
➢ Chilliwack Proper, Sardis-Vedder, Chilliwack Mountain ( There would be no additions required, over and above what would be planned for all models, to service the new residential areas north of the Trans Canada along Prest Road. The increase in population south of the Trans Canada in Sardis-Vedder would be serviced by the new hall in Sardis. No expansion to this hall would be required; however, an additional truck at a cost of $500,000 would be needed. This expenditure would occur in year 2010.
The development of 200 new hectares of industrial and commercial land in the valley under Model 2b would require the addition, over time, of two new aerial trucks to the Fire Department's force. These would cost approximately $500,000 each. They are slotted in years 2008 and 2015.
The total net present value of the future expenditures is $885,885.
➢ Promontory, Eastern Hillsides, Ryder Lake ( Urban development is not considered for these areas under Model 2b.
Net present value
The net present value of the listed fire department expenditures required under Model 2b is:
$885,885.
3. Model 2c: Favoured Direction (future)
The following points identify the fire department expenditures that would be required, over and above what would be needed in all models, to service new development under Model 2c:
➢ Chilliwack Proper, Sardis-Vedder, Chilliwack Mountain ( There would be no specific expenditures, over and above what would be required for all models, to service residential populations under this scenario. The Department's planned additions in Chilliwack Proper would be sufficient to service the new 14,000 residents called for along Prest Road.
The development of 200 new hectares of industrial and commercial land in the valley would, as under Model 2b, require the addition of two new aerial trucks to the Fire Department's force. These would cost approximately $500,000 each. They are slotted for years 2008 and 2015, and have a net present value of $578,928.
➢ Promontory ( Promontory is serviced by the new Sardis Hall. No additional expenditures would be required under this model.
➢ Eastern Hillsides ( As under Model 2a, a new hall would be required at the base of Eastern Hillsides on Annis Road for development under Model 2c. The capital cost of the hall would be $1.5 million, plus the $500,000 on land already spent. The costs for the new hall are factored, in the spreadsheets, to begin in 2004. They have a net present value of $1,704,671.
➢ Ryder Lake ( Changes in Ryder Lake under Model 2c would be similar to the changes forecasted for 2a. The existing rural hall in would need to be relocated to the Village Centre, at a capital cost of $2 million. An additional truck would likely be required for $500,000. The development of the Ryder Lake Hall would take place beginning 2016. The net present value of the future expenditures is $1,112,557.
Net present value
The net present value of the listed fire department expenditures required under Model 2c is:
$3,396,156.
7. Other
In addition to the services discussed above, the study considered R.C.M.P. and urban transit to determine if there were major cost differences associated with these functions under the different development models. In each case, it was concluded that any differences among the models would be insignificant. The text below briefly reviews these two functions.
3.2.7.1 R.C.M.P.
The future development models were reviewed with the Operations / Support NCO at Chilliwack Detachment. Future costs related to facilities and vehicles were considered.
➢ Facilities ( Under all development models, it is assumed that the City would continue to have one central station. A new station is being planned to replace the existing one sometime in the next ten years, when the current facility is outgrown. This new station, however, would be required under all models. Under Models 2a and 2c (i.e., dispersed development pattern), the R.C.M.P. would likely place a community policing station in Eastern Hillsides and/or Ryder Lake to service the upland areas. These stations would be small facilities with a few shared offices and interview rooms. They would likely be incorporated into new or existing public buildings such as recreation facilities or community schools. As such, their capital costs would be minimal.
➢ Vehicles ( At the outset of the study, it was thought that vehicle costs would be substantially different under the various models. Intuitively, it seemed that police vehicles in a dispersed future Chilliwack (e.g., Model 2a or 2c) would be required to drive much farther than in a concentrated City (e.g., Model 2b) over a given period of time to service urban areas. Under dispersed development, it was thought that police vehicles would reach their replacement point of 150,000 kilometres sooner than under compact development, and would, therefore, need to be replaced more often at an average cost of $24,000 per vehicle.
Discussions with the NCO revealed, however, that any differences in vehicle costs under the different models would be minimal. In Models 2a and 2c, the R.C.M.P. would apply a system of zone policing under which members and their vehicles would be assigned to zones in the urban areas of Ryder Lake and Eastern Hillsides. Members would spend their entire shifts within these zones in order to provide adequate response times to the public. Members would only leave the zones at shift change times; they would not drive between the uplands and the valley areas during shifts. Given the zone policing system, it is assumed that the distances driven by members under the different development models would not be significantly different. Vehicle costs, therefore, would be more-or-less the same.
3.2.7.2 Urban Transit
BC Transit presently operates a total of seven routes within Chilliwack Proper and Sardis-Vedder. These routes provide Chilliwack with 16,600 hours of transit service for a service area population of approximately 50,000. These figures translate into 0.33 hours of service per capita.
The City and BC Transit recently co-produced the Chilliwack Comprehensive Municipal Transit Plan: 1999 – 2017. This document presents various expansion scenarios for the bus system over the immediate-future and longer-term. The targets set in the various scenarios range from a standard-growth scenario target of 0.56 service hours per capita, to an aggressive-growth scenario target of 1.25 service hours per capita.
When transit planning is driven by per capita targets, the geography of development is not a major influence on the cost of the service. In a future Chilliwack of 134,000, for example, a bus system built to a target of 0.56 service hours per capita would cost essentially the same under both a concentrated development model (e.g., Model 2b) and a dispersed development model (e.g., Model 2a or 2c). Routes and frequency-of-pickup would be different under the various development patterns; but the capital costs associated with the function would be essentially the same. In assessing the cost of meeting a per capita target, it is the 134,000 population that is important, not the geography of the population.
3.3 Differences in Non-residential Assessment
The provision of new industrial land for economic development is an essential component of any future growth strategy in Chilliwack. In order to become a complete and sustainable community, Chilliwack must be able to attract and accommodate new business and industry. The need for new economic development lands is particularly acute in Chilliwack since, at present, the City has less than 30 hectares of vacant industrial land in its inventory. Moreover, these lands are fragmented into small, less desirable parcels.
The City's Future Plan Committee understood the need to identify new lands for economic development purposes. It also understood that such lands would need to be suitably located to meet the needs of businesses in the future. Central among these needs is the requirement to be located on flat, well-serviced sites that provide easy access to the Trans-Canada Highway.
Future Plan Committee identified a total of 259 hectares of future economic development land that meets the needs of business. This amount was deemed sufficient to accommodate future businesses and industry, most of which would be housed in clean, high quality business parks. These business parks are known for their unique blends of companies and uses, campus-style layouts, quality support services and pedestrian scale of development. Total future demand to the year 2020 for business park space is forecasted in the various Future Plan documents to be just over 200 hectares, which would leave close to 60 hectares of economic development land in reserve.
All 259 hectares of land is situated between Chilliwack Proper and Sardis-Vedder, north of the Trans-Canada. All of the land is also presently within the ALR ( a situation which makes the cooperation of the ALC essential. As noted earlier in section 3.1.1, the ALC recently rejected the Future Plan Committee's appeal to release the required lands. In this study, Model 2a recognizes the ALC's rejection and assumes no future business park development on any of these lands. Models 2b and 2c, conversely, both assume the release of the 259 hectares of land from the ALR (see figures 4 and 5 respectively). Both models assume that slightly over 200 hectares of these lands would be developed for new businesses and industries to the year 2020.
The examination of differences in business and industrial assessment bases does not, it should be noted, take into account the retail development or smaller-scale commercial development that would take place in the various regions of the different models. The differences associated with these types of developments would be very small compared to the main difference associated with the development – or non-development – of 200 hectares of high quality business parks. The focus of this section, therefore, is on the future business parks.
1. Value of Business Park Developments
This section of the report reviews the methodology used, and assumptions made, to determine a value for the future business park developments under Models 2b and 2c. A spreadsheet showing the complete calculations and values used is provided in Appendix 3.
The following points summarize the approach taken:
➢ Land Values ( An average cost of land per m2 was developed for both business (commercial) lands and industrial lands, since these two uses would co-exist in the new business parks. The average land costs were determined after taking into account a number of influencing factors, including:
- existing commercial and industrial land costs in Chilliwack
- the location of the lands between Chilliwack Proper and Sardis-Vedder, north of the Trans-Canada
- the access to municipal services
- the lands' close proximity to the Trans-Canada, a major transportation corridor
- the availability of large contiguous parcels of land
- the high quality nature of the business park developments
- the need to be conservative for projection purposes
Based on these factors, an average land cost of $100 per m2 was chosen for commercial land, and $60 per m2 was chosen for industrial land.
➢ Finished Construction Costs ( Finished construction costs for development in the Chilliwack area were reviewed to establish typical costs. Finished commercial construction costs presently range between $1000 and $1,500 per m2 for quality business park office developments such as the Chilliwack Business Estates. Based on the continued development of these types of parks, an average finished commercial construction cost of $1,250 per m2 was assumed.
Finished industrial construction costs presently range between $750 and $1,000 per m2 for manufacturing and higher order industrial facilities. An average finished industrial construction cost of $875 per m2 was assumed.
➢ Projected Future Development ( The Future Plan Committee identified a requirement of 202.4 ha for new business park development to year 2020. Since both business and industrial uses will co-exist in these business parks, it is important to determine how much of each type of use would be developed.
For the purpose of this study, it was assumed that 50.6 ha, or 25% of the total 202.4 ha, would be developed for commercial uses (i.e., businesses). At an average commercial site coverage of 30% and an average building height of two stories, these 50.6 ha of land would yield 303,660 m2 of new business development over the entire study period. It was assumed that development would occur in a linear fashion, at approximately 14,460 m2 per year.
Industrial developments, it was assumed, would use the remaining 151.8 ha. At an average industrial site coverage of 12.5% and an average building height of one story, these 151.8 ha of land would accommodate 190,000 m2 of new industrial floorspace over the study period. As with commercial uses, it was assumed that the development of the industrial floorspace would occur in a linear fashion, at about 9,000 m2 per year.
➢ Equity Gain ( Construction and land values provide the cost of development, but they do not always reflect the market value of development. In general, the market value of commercial and industrial development is influenced by the developer's equity gain, which is related to the lease rates that can be charged. A conservative equity gain factor of 10% was added to the commercial and industrial land and construction costs to provide an indication of market (assessed) value.
➢ Tax Rate ( The property tax revenue collected by the City is a function of both the assessed value of the development and the City's tax rates. The current commercial tax rate of $12.77 per $1,000 assessed value was used to calculate the value of the business component in future business park developments. The current light industrial tax rate of $10.78 per $1,000 assessed value was used to calculate the value of the industrial component.
The forgoing values, when combined, indicate that Chilliwack could expect a net present value of $35,801,458 in commercial tax revenue, and a net present value of $18,071,505 in industrial tax revenue from future business park development. In total, the net present value of expected revenues would be $53,872,964. This figure represents the amount of property tax revenue that Chilliwack would receive under Models 2b and 2c. More importantly, it also represents the amount of revenue that Chilliwack would forgo under Model 2a.
3.4 Conclusion
Table 3.4.1 summarizes the additional costs that Chilliwack is expected to incur, and the property tax revenues that Chilliwack is expected to forgo, under the three future development models. All figures reflect the net present value of future costs and revenues.
Table 3.4.1
Summary of Expected Costs and
Forgone Revenues for Each Model
|Expected Costs and |Model 2a: |Model 2b: |Model 2c: |
|Forgone Revenues |New OCP |Valley Focus |Favoured Direction |
|Costs | | | |
| |Water |37,228,693 |3,291,091 |27,444,950 |
| |Sewer |30,588,897 |17,085,776 |30,242,720 |
| |Drainage |9,385,178 |1,488,693 |7,194,343 |
| |Roads |135,969,011 |100,158,117 |128,994,685 |
| |Parks, Recreation, Libraries |21,159,006 |6,445,814 |12,867,977 |
| |Fire Department |3,056,991 |885,885 |3,396,156 |
| |Other |0 |0 |0 |
|Sub-total |$ 237,387,776 |$ 129,355,376 |$ 210,140,831 |
| | | | | |
|Forgone Revenues | | | |
| |Business Park Developments |53,872,964 |0 |0 |
|Sub-total |$ 53,872,964 |$ 0 |$ 0 |
| | | | | |
|Total |$ 291,260,740 |$ 129,355,376 |$ 210,140,831 |
Table 3.4.1 shows that the combination of expected additional capital costs and forgone property tax revenues totals $291,260,740 for Model 2a, $129,355,376 for Model 2b and $210,140,831 for Model 2c.
Subtracting Model 2b's total from that of Model 2a gives one estimate of the ALC's future economic impact as $161,905,364. This number represents the net present value of the future cost to the City of developing under the new OCP, instead of under a more compact, valley-focused development pattern.
Subtracting Model 2c's total from that of Model 2a gives a second estimate of the ALC's future economic impact as $81,119,909. This number represents the net present value of the future cost to the City of developing under the new OCP, instead of under the Future Plan Committee's (modified) favoured direction.
4. Conclusion
This study was commissioned on the premise that the ALC's continued refusal to release ALR lands for new valley development has had – and will continue to have – a negative economic impact on the municipality. Urban Systems was asked to quantify, to the extent possible, both the past and future economic impacts of the ALC's position.
The past economic impact was determined, in section 2 of the report, to be $20,516,897. This figure reflects both the extra servicing costs, and the forgone revenues, associated with Chilliwack's development between 1992 and 1999.
Two future economic impact estimates were provided in section 3 of the report. The estimate of $161,905,364 represents the future cost to the City of developing under the new OCP instead of under a more compact, valley-focused development pattern. The estimate of $81,119,909 represents the cost to the City of developing under the new OCP instead of under the Future Plan Committee's (modified) favoured direction.
The estimates determined in this report are not considered to be precise, definitive measurements of the ALC's actual past and future economic impacts. The estimates are, instead, offered as order-of-magnitude, defensible measures of what the ALC's past economic impact has been, and what the ALC's future economic impact is likely to be.
-----------------------
[pic]
-----------------------
[pic]
................
................
In order to avoid copyright disputes, this page is only a partial summary.
To fulfill the demand for quickly locating and searching documents.
It is intelligent file search solution for home and business.
Related searches
- city of university city mo
- city of kansas city kansas
- city of u city mo
- city of kansas city mo
- city of university city missouri
- city of kansas city ks
- city of gadsden city council
- city of irving city hall
- city of worthington city council
- city of missouri city permits
- city of university city permits
- city of rapid city water