The city is slated to contribute $8.6 million toward a road opening up industrial lands north of The Kingsway.
City council members made this decision following a lengthy discussion at Tuesday’s finance and administration committee meeting, which followed discussions at two prior meetings.
A decision on the cost-sharing agreement was originally expected last month, but Ward 7 Coun. Natalie Labbée introduced a successful deferral which pushed it to the April 22 meeting.
An hour-long closed session meeting of city council took place on March 25 to discuss the matter, after which the public was offered no additional insight regarding the deferral.
Throughout this process, Labbée declined to indicate why she requested the deferral, other than that “some new information” had come to her attention.
“I’m not sure why the media decided to make it like it was a nefarious request,” Labbée said during Tuesday’s meeting. “I don’t even have to give a reason why I asked for a deferral.”
The deferral request, she said, came in response to last month’s municipal report which clarified that Greater Sudbury’s degrading roads are underfunded by $77.8 million annually.
“When we look at all these roads that we can’t take care of, I have a problem now putting forward more taxpayer money for a road that leads to nowhere that we have to pay about $200,000 a year on to maintain it when there’s no return on investment timeline for us to get this money back,” she said.
She also pointed to other industrial parks in the city which already exist where developers aren’t asking for municipal funding.
Ward 4 Coun. Pauline Fortin also flagged the infrastructure spending gap as reason to oppose the cost-sharing arrangement.
“I can’t see supporting building another road when we were just told to stop building roads,” Fortin said. “I think this is working against what we’re trying to do.”
Although the consultants behind the roads infrastructure spending gap report did clarify that the city should focus on existing roads, and even look at reducing its roads inventory, city Linear Infrastructure Services director Joe Rocca clarified that this project is unique.
One strategy to reduce the city’s infrastructure spending gap, he said, “is to encourage development in the community, is to grow that tax base, so it’s imperative for council to make strategic investments and expanding some infrastructure to help grow that tax base, especially in these types of employment lands.”
“While it is an increase in infrastructure, it’s an important increase that unlocks lands that provide more funding to the community as a whole,” he said.
Ward 10 Coun. Fern Cormier echoed this sentiment in his remarks, noting that while he understands opposition to what some might view as “corporate welfare,” this project is unique.
The road in question would extend Levesque Street northward to help open up 30 hectares of industrial land north of The Kingsway as part of a broader 70-acre industrial subdivision called the Jack Nicholas Business and Innovation Subdivision, which is also referred to as the Kingsway Employment District.
Although it would stretch to the developer’s northern property line, the municipal road is eventually anticipated to extend farther north to Lasalle Boulevard and is part of the city’s Official Plan.
Cormier noted that there was “not a peep from anybody anywhere” when city council members unanimously approved cost-sharing arrangements to extend Remington Road earlier this year. That project will see the city contribute $3,767,671 to help open up 50 acres of industrial land, including a $1,883,835 pledge, with the balance delivered through development charge credits.
He also cited the Silver Hills Subdivision, for which city council members approved a similar cost-sharing arrangement.
As for the $8.6-million cost-sharing arrangement approved on Tuesday, $2,866,296 was approved via municipal reimbursements to the developer upon substantial completion of the road, and $5,732,592 in transferable development charge credits.
The total eligible project cost is $11,465,185, of which the developer would foot the bill for its $2,866,296 balance (25 per cent). Ineligible costs include such things as water/wastewater infrastructure which the developer is responsible for.
The road would be handed over to the municipality once completed, and the cost-sharing arrangement has a sunset clause which stipulates that it must be substantially complete by Oct. 26, 2026, when the draft plan of subdivision expires.
“The city would not be building this road, it is the developer building this road and we will contribute to it once it’s over,” meeting chair and Ward 9 Coun. Deb. McIntosh said. The developer, she said, “will have a motivation to develop and do things with it.”
During Tuesday’s meeting, Mayor Paul Lefebvre urged his colleagues to support the cost-sharing arrangement by promoting it as a means of expanding the tax base.
“What I’m concerned about tonight is that this council has really shown an ability, and the first time in a long time that I'm hearing from a lot of developers, ‘You guys are open for business,’” he said.
“If we wait, that client, customer, that developer we may have attracted will go somewhere else.”
During Tuesday’s meeting, city council members voted 9-4 to approve the cost-sharing arrangement.
Ward 3 Michel Brabant, Ward 4 Coun. Pauline Fortin and Ward 7 Coun Natalie Labbée voted against the cost-sharing agreement, and Ward 5 Coun. Mike Parent abstained from voting, but it was more a gesture than anything since abstentions are recorded as “no.”
During Tuesday’s meeting, Parent said he’d need stronger guarantees of a municipal return on investment before approving such an arrangement.
Although their decision still needs to be ratified by city council as a whole during the next regular city council meeting on April 29, all 14 members were at Tuesday’s finance and administration committee meeting, which points to a likelihood that it will ultimately pass.
During Tuesday’s meeting, Labbée introduced a successful resolution for the city to review its policy on cost-sharing arrangements to establish criteria for applicants, “such as being in good standing with regard to all property taxes and all contractual obligations with the City of Greater Sudbury.”
Tyler Clarke covers city hall and political affairs for Sudbury.com.