To encourage the redevelopment of former service station sites, Municipalities should consult with property owners and developers to clearly communicate their Community Vision, develop their Brownfield Redevelopment Strategy, and identify the interests of property owners and developers. The Community Vision and Brownfield Redevelopment Strategy should identify and prioritize typical service stations as key brownfield redevelopment opportunities within the Municipality. In addition, municipalities should consider promoting their brownfield strategies and financial incentives and in particular, clearly show the Municipality's interest in working with developers and property owners. Municipalities may develop a Community Improvement Plan (CIP) as a tool to encourage redevelopment.

For more information, please refer to the Key Element: Early Planning Tools.

Best Practices

1. Consult with the community, property owners, and developers on the Community Vision, Brownfield Redevelopment Strategy, CIP, and redevelopment priorities
2. Identify and prioritize the redevelopment of service stations as part of the municipal Brownfield Redevelopment Strategy
3. Promote brownfield strategies and financial incentives that are targeted to the redevelopment of typical service stations

Prospective developers and property owners often indicate that the municipal planning approval process (e.g. Official Plan (OP); Sub-division of Land; Zoning Bylaws; Site Plan Approval; and Building Permits) can be a significant barrier to redevelopment. The main issue is the length of time required to obtain specific approvals and the delays due to inconsistent municipal approaches. Municipalities should consider streamlining their planning approval processes to better align with the timelines under which developers operate. Actions to consider that could streamline the municipal planning approval process may include:

1. Develop clear, upfront planning policies (e.g. Official Plan and Zoning Bylaws) to help encourage redevelopment. It is important to note that it typically takes 1.5 to 2 years to approve Official Plan Amendments.
2. Consider implementing a Development Permit System (DPS) or carrying out municipally-initiated pre-zoning targeted to potential interim and end land-uses of a typical service station site.
   • The DPS provides a land use approval framework which could help to facilitate and streamline development approvals. The DPS can be used to provide strategic, integrated and long-term planning that gives certainty, transparency and accountability on the requirements to development in a particular area.
   • Pre-zoning that has been initiated by the municipality prior to a request from the development community, such as changing the zoning from "service station" to "industrial/commercial", may encourage redevelopment and does not require the filing of a Record of Site Condition (RSC).

For more information, please refer to the Key Element: Early Planning Tools.

Best Practices

1. Examine and revise Official Plans and current Zoning Bylaws to encourage the redevelopment of service stations through clear, upfront, and predictable planning policies
2. Create and implement flexible planning tools that will streamline the approvals for service station redevelopment and provide certainty to developers

Early and ongoing communication is a key success factor to the redevelopment of typical service stations. Poor communication is often a major barrier that impedes redevelopment projects. Municipalities should take on the role of facilitator to ensure effective communication and coordination. This includes identifying key stakeholders to be engaged; working with developers and interest groups to identify potential redevelopment options (both interim and end land-uses for typical service stations); and distributing information on the proposed remediation and redevelopment plan. It is important to note that although public consultation is recommended throughout the process of redeveloping former service stations, public consultation is a mandatory requirement at specific stages in the redevelopment process as identified in current provincial legislation.

For more information, please refer to the Key Element: Mandatory Public Consultation.

Best Practices

1. Consult early and facilitate regular communication with all stakeholders regarding service station redevelopment opportunities
2. Conduct both mandatory (as required by legislation) and recommended public consultation

Municipalities should identify and develop good working relationships with other relevant government agencies prior to undertaking projects to redevelop service stations in their communities. This includes upper-tier municipalities (where applicable) and provincial and federal governments. All of these governments have regulations and policies that municipalities will need to comply with to successfully redevelop service stations.

For more information, please refer to the Key Element: Mandatory Public Consultation.

Best Practices

1. Identify and develop good working relationships with other relevant government agencies that have jurisdictional authority over specific aspects of remediation and redevelopment of former service stations

Municipalities should consult with the development community to develop financial incentive packages that will meet their needs and enable the successful redevelopment of typical service stations. The difference between the current and potential value of the redeveloped property often dictates whether a developer would require financial incentives and the specific type of incentive that is needed. Financial incentives can be a significant component in "creating value" for typical service stations. One important aspect that municipalities should consider is that many of the current financial incentives are triggered during the redevelopment phase. There should be discussions between the Municipality, the developer, and the company that is conducting the remediation to ensure fair distribution of financial incentives.

For more information, please refer to the Key Element: Financial Incentives.

Best Practices

1. Target financial incentives to meet the needs of the developer who will be redeveloping the service station and the specific organization that incurs the remediation costs

Municipalities need to understand the cost-benefit and longer-term value of having a well-conducted and comprehensive Phase II ESA that has been completed by a Qualified Person (QP) on a typical service station. Former service station sites often require a site specific Risk Assessment (RA) to determine Property Specific Standards (PSS) as cleanup criteria and comprehensive Phase II ESAs provide the information upon which to base a site specific risk assessment. Risk assessments used to develop PSS for remediation or to implement Risk Management (RM) plans are based on sound science and rationale that incorporates detailed site specific information. A less comprehensive Phase II ESA may be sufficient for a municipality's needs when approving plan amendments (e.g. Official Plan, CIP, Site Plan), but may result in future project delays and additional costs when a more comprehensive study or a Supplementary Phase II ESA is required. Municipalities should view a well-conducted and comprehensive Phase II ESA, that addresses all site concerns and potential offsite contamination, as a sound up-front investment that will pay long-term dividends.

The cost of a Phase II ESA can be considerable due to the cost of sampling and laboratory analysis. As it is often difficult to obtain funding to assist with the cost of carrying out a comprehensive Phase II ESA, municipalities should consider creating a financial incentive for site characterization to assist in offsetting the costs of comprehensive Phase II ESAs.

Understanding the information provided in a Phase II ESA as well as the potential implications is a critical part of improving the review and approval time. Municipalities may wish to request that the developer and the QP provide an affidavit to the Municipality that explains the Phase II ESA in very simple and plain language.

For more information, please refer to the Key Elements: Phase II Environmental Site Assessment, Supplementary Phase II ESA, and Financial Incentives.

Best Practices

1. Request that a high quality and comprehensive Phase II ESA is performed on the service station site
2. Ensure that the supplementary Phase II ESA is rigorous and thorough to meet all data requirements for a Risk Assessment
3. Create financial incentives to offset the costs of site assessment (e.g. Phase II ESA)
4. Request a letter or affidavit from the Qualified Person that summarizes and explains the results and potential implications of the Phase II ESA

Municipalities should work closely with developers and other key interest groups to identify redevelopment options for former service station sites. Planning and zoning restrictions, small land size or footprint of the property, remediation costs, and Community Vision all need to be considered when assessing the redevelopment potential of a former service station site. Once a Phase II ESA report has been received, stakeholders can use the Screening Matrix for Property Use & Redevelopment Potential of Typical Service Stations in Ontario. The screening matrix assists a municipality in making a preliminary assessment regarding the redevelopment potential of former service station sites. The matrix also identifies how a site can move from having a low potential for redevelopment to a high potential by increasing the property value, decreasing the costs of remediation and by using early municipal development tools and incentives. It is important for municipalities and stakeholders to understand that the successful redevelopment of contaminated sites is highly dependent on having a realistic plan based on value, location, and potential usage.

If a potential viable end land-use can not be identified, the Municipality and property owner may consider developing an interim surface land-use which may include aesthetic improvement of the site. It is important that municipalities identify potential interim land-uses that would not trigger the need to file an RSC and do not pose additional environmental and/or health risks. Examples of interim land-uses include parking lots and landscaping. Access to the site may be required for periodic monitoring or remediation activities and should be considered in any interim plan. It is important to note that the property owner may require the Municipality to take responsibility for surface management of the site to address potential liability concerns with the interim land-use.

For more information, please refer to the Key Element: Potential Property Use.

Best Practices

1. Work with property owners, developers and other stakeholders to identify redevelopment potential and options for typical service station sites
2. Consider planning and zoning restrictions, size of site, remediation costs, and Community Vision when assessing the redevelopment potential of a typical service station
3. Use the Screening Matrix for Property Use & Redevelopment Potential of Typical Service Stations in Ontario to make a preliminary assessment regarding the redevelopment potential for typical service stations and to assist in the selection of the "best land-use"
4. Consider potential interim land-uses for former service station sites

Municipalities may delay the redevelopment of a typical service station due to liability issues associated with the potential offsite migration of Contaminants of Concern (COCs). Municipalities and property owners should work cooperatively to develop a clear and well understood protocol for managing offsite migration. Municipalities should consider the use of site-specific agreements (e.g. letters on file) between the Municipality and the property owner that identifies the COCs, offsite migration concerns and mechanisms for addressing public and environmental safety concerns. These agreements should include the property owner accepting responsibility for offsite contamination and their commitment to manage, monitor, and address offsite contamination as recommended by a Risk Management Plan. The Redevelopment Framework provides examples where municipalities have developed site-specific agreements with property owners that allow COCs to remain under road-access and right-of-ways, provided that the property owner maintains responsibility for monitoring, management and remediation as required to ensure public health, safety, and risk and liability protection.

Municipalities should develop an understanding regarding the potential issues related to co-mingled plumes at service station sites. The Canadian Petroleum Products Institute (CPPI) has developed a draft protocol to address co-mingled plumes by providing best management practices to assist in the timely and cost effective resolution of complex offsite contamination when two CPPI member companies are involved. Municipalities should consider the use of this tool to manage co-mingled plume issues. The CPPI Draft Protocol focuses on the following:

• Establishment of a national "best management practice" process to assist in the timely and cost effective resolution of complex offsite contamination matters involving two or more CPPI member companies.
• Reduction of potential regulatory and civil liability exposure and associated legal costs
• Providing a flexible framework that can be tailored to site specific situations
• Protecting legal rights of individual companies while providing a constructive process for collectively assessing and addressing co-mingled contamination
• Obtaining CPPI member company commitment to follow the protocol (e.g. signature at senior CPPI committee level)
• Including non-CPPI companies that commit to the Protocol

For more information, please refer to the Key Element: Offsite Considerations.

Best Practices

1. Develop site specific agreements between the municipality and the property owner that allow COCs to remain under road-access and right-of-ways
2. Proactively manage issues related to potential co-mingled plumes

Municipalities should encourage property owners and developers to obtain clarification of property values and tax class by the Municipal Property Assessment Corporation (MPAC) prior to remediation to achieve the greatest gain from Tax Increment Equivalent Grants, one of the financial incentives that may be offered by a municipality. Property owners and developers should evaluate the savings achieved by tax reductions through an assessment prior to making decisions that may alter the property (e.g. removal of a building, etc.).

For more information, please refer to the Key Element: Property Assessment.

Best Practices

1. Encourage property owners and developers to obtain clarification of property values by the Municipal Property Assessment Corporation (MPAC) prior to remediation

Municipalities should require that a record of site condition be filed for all typical service station redevelopment projects where ownership or land use is going to change. While a RSC is only required by the Ontario Ministry of the Environment when changing to a more sensitive property use, municipalities should require the filing of an RSC in all service station sites since it can provide protection from regulatory liability including future cleanup orders.

For more information, please refer to the Key Element: Record of Site Condition.

Best Practices

1. File a record of site condition (RSC) for all service station redevelopment projects where ownership or land use is going to change

Municipalities, property owners, and developers should investigate their options regarding how to manage their risk and liability for typical service station sites. One example is to obtain an insurance policy or indemnification which can offer both regulatory and third-party claim protection.

For more information, please refer to the Key Element: Remediation, Risk Assessment and Risk Management.

Best Practices

1. Investigate options regarding risk protection for typical service station sites

Municipalities should consider developing and maintaining a process for information sharing and data management regarding work that has been conducted on contaminated sites. This resource could be available as an internal database to provide information such as site work carried out by municipal departments, environmental assessments, potential concerns related to the COCs, Risk Management Measures (RMMs) and Certificate of Property Use (CPU). This is a measure that has been successfully used by the City of Hamilton where they have developed a process to share information internally regarding work conducted on contaminated properties.

For more information, please refer to the Key Element: Site Management and Monitoring.

Best Practices

1. Develop and maintain a process for information sharing and management related to site work conducted on contaminated properties
2. Develop and maintain a database of all active and decommissioned service stations

Municipalities should encourage property owners and developers to obtain a reassessment of the property through the Municipal Property Assessment Corporation (MPAC) upon redevelopment of the site. The assessed value of the property will be the highest, and the tax class may also have changed. This will trigger the maximum potential benefits from Tax Increment Equivalent Grants.

For more information, please refer to the Key Element: Property Assessment.

Best Practices

1. Encourage property owners and developers to reassess the property value (MPAC) upon redevelopment of the site to trigger the maximum benefits associated with Tax Increment Equivalent Grants

The District Office of the Ontario Ministry of the Environment (at the discretion of the Director) can provide Risk Protection for a property and the community by requiring that the property owner provide financial assurance when RMMs are required or imposed. These are generally associated with maintaining "active" measures such as active ventilation, effluent treatment systems or on-going monitoring programs. Municipalities may wish to identify sites that have RMMs and CPUs imposed by the Province.

For more information, please refer to the Key Element: Site Management and Monitoring.

Best Practices

1. Incorporate information regarding RMMs and CPUs for redeveloped service stations into the municipal data management system
2. Undertake due diligence to ensure that the site is being managed regarding the RMMs and CPUs that have been imposed on service stations