HomeMy WebLinkAboutPD-57-95DN: HIGH- STR.G ,HE CORPORATION OF THE MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON
REPORT
Meeting: General Purpose and Administration Committee File #
Date: Monday, June 5, 1995 Res. # ' �L
PD -57 -95 PLN 22.1
Report #: File #: By -law #
Subject: HIGH STREET PROPERTY
LOTS 36, 37, 38 AND 39, REGISTERED PLAN NO. 685
FILE: PLN 22.1
Recommendations:
It is respectfully recommended that the General Purpose and
Administration Committee recommend to Council the following:
1. THAT Report PD -57 -95 be received; and
2. THAT Council approve Option 3 with respect to the disposition
of the High Street Property.
1. BACKGROUND
1.1 In November of 1994, the Planning and Development Department
was approached by Marianna Developments regarding the
possibility of acquiring 4 lots on High Street currently owned
by the Municipality (see Attachment #1). Marianna
Developments is the abutting property owner to the west and
currently has a subdivision agreement with the Municipality
covering the abutting lands (18T- 84035).
1.2 On December 21, 1994 Council passed a resolution authorizing
the Director of Planning and Development to proceed with an
appraisal of lots 36 to 39 inclusive on Registered Plan No.
685.
1.3 In January of 1995, Property Valuators /Consulting Inc.
submitted an appraisal report indicating that the value that
the 4 lots would accommodate 8 semi - detached dwelling units
with a market value of $208,000.00 exclusive of servicing costs
REPORT NO.: PD -57 -95 PAGE 2
and development charges. The cost of the appraisal report
($1000.00) was shared equally by Marianna Developments and the
Municipality.
1.4 Staff subsequently met with Mr. Mario Veltri of Marianna
Developments, who after having reviewed the contents of the
appraisal report, advised that he was not interested in
aqcuiring the property at this time.
2. STAFF COMMENTS
2.1 Although Mr. Veltri is no longer interested, the question
remains as to the available options left to the Municipality.
2.2 Option #1
The first option available to the Municipality is to retain
ownership of the lots. The advantage of Option #1 is that the
current market conditions may improve and the appraised value
could be adjusted upward in the future. However, it must be
recognized that anticipating future market conditions is
difficult at best, and the Municipality will end up retaining
ownership for an indefinite period of time.
2.3 Option #2
The second option available to the Municipality would be of
dispose of the property through public tender. The
disposition of the property would provide the Municipality
with an influx of capital which could be invested or used for
the acquisition of other property such as waterfront lands.
If this option is preferred by Council, the following
conditions would be imposed through the tender process:
® a reserve bid would be included to ensure that a
reasonable purchase price was obtained;
528
REPORT NO.: PD -57 -95 PAGE 3
the Offer of Purchase and Sale would contain a
provision that the lands could not be transferred;
and,
® a building permit must be applied for within two
(2) years of the closing date.
2.4 Option #3
This option is essentially a combination of the above 2
options. The approach is to dispose the lands through public
tender at such time as the abutting subdivision to the west is
developed. At that time, High Street would be opened and
serviced and it would render the lands more marketable. The
lands will be re- appraised and disposed of by public tender
process as outlined in Option 2. At this time Mr. Veltri, who
owns the subdivision to the west, advised that he has no
immediate plan to commence construction of the subdivision.
3. CONCLUSION
3.1 Of the 3 options proposed, Option 3 appears to be most
appealing and is recommended accordingly.
Respectfully submitted, Reviewed by,
-
Franklin Wu, M.C.I.P., R.P.P. W.H. Stockwell
Director of Planning Chief Administrative
and Development Officer
WM *FW *df
24 May 1995
Attachment #1 - Location Map
2Y
L11�lo�