No satisfaction at property value session

Posted Feb 2, 2012 By John Curry

EMC News - It was a session on property value that those in attendance ended up feeling had no value.

Indeed, by the end of the two hour and 20 minute session, held as part of the ongoing Environmental Assessment for the proposed new landfill at Waste Management's Carp Road site, there were suggestions that another meeting where better information would be presented was needed, a view backed up by an informal show of hands by the 65 people in attendance.

Two Ottawa city councillors from the area who were among those in attendance voiced the disenchantment felt with the meeting.

West Carleton/March ward councillor Eli El-Chantiry, in remarks at the end of the meeting, said that he heard loud and clear from the meeting that more work needs to be done on the property value issue. He said that he would be talking to Waste Management about holding another session with better information.

Stittsville ward councillor Shad Qadri, in his comments at the conclusion of the meeting, suggested that most of those at the meeting were dissatisfied with what was presented, saying that he thought that a property value prevention plan was going to be presented and nothing definite was forthcoming, just draft principles.

He said that Waste Management had come forward in this session offering the least amount of information possible, adding that it is now "back to square one."

Councillor Qadri said that Waste Management would be wasting the community's time with another meeting, saying that the community does not have time to attend another such meeting - remarks that drew applause from those in the room at the West Carleton Meeting Centre on Richardson Sideroad, site of the meeting on Wednesday, Jan. 25.

Following councillor Qadri's remarks, Waste Management representative Don Wright stated that within a month, Waste Management will produce a specific property value prevention plan except for the determination of the area to which the plan will apply.

Councillor Qadri replied that Waste Management should look at the size of the area for such plans at other landfills, suggesting that the area should be more than 500 metres radius from the landfill site, although perhaps not as wide as a one and a half mile radius used at an Alberta landfill site operated by Waste Management.

At the session, Waste Management presented proposed principles related to a property value protection plan to provide property owners affected by the proposed new landfill with protection against a reduction in the value of their homes.

These principles included a provision that the plan would apply only to registered property owners at the time that the proposed new landfill was announced in April 2010, that the plan would apply only to residential property, that the plan would apply only to properties within a designated area, and that the designated area would only be determined after Waste Management receives its Certificate of Approval for the new landfill.

The proposal to restrict the plan to residential properties irked Carp Road resident and businessman Peter Kondruss who argued that commercial properties should be included as well, noting that there were a lot of small businesses located in the area.

"We should be all included in that," he said with regard to the property value protection plan, noting that these businesses, many of them "mom and pop" operations, had invested money in their enterprises.

"You have to go back to the drawing board on this one, let me tell you," he said.

Harold Moore of West Carleton pointed out that a Waste Management landfill site in Alberta has a one and a half mile radius to which its property value protection plan applies. He said that in the Carp Road case, Waste Management is going to be trying to keep the plan's radius as small as possible because over 3,000 homes would be covered if the radius were set at a mile and a half like the Alberta situation.

He even suggested that Waste Management will eventually come up with a 500 metre distance, cutting out as many properties as possible.

It was more than the proposed principles of the property value protection plan that drew criticism at the meeting.

A presentation on how property values in the area have been affected by the presence of the Carp Road landfill site, done by Ottawa area property assessor Glenn Lucas, showed that data from residential sales in the Granite Ridge, Timbermere and Huntley Ridge subdivisions shows that there are no observable adverse effects on sales due to the presence of the landfill site. Sales in all three areas are within the parameters of sales within the general Ottawa area in terms of days on the market and percentage of selling price received.

This latest study by Mr. Lucas reinforces a similar study using different properties which he undertook back in 2009.

Mr. Lucas dismissed a couple of anecdotal references to properties not selling in the area of the landfill site as suggested by audience members.

"We can't use the exceptional to create the rule," he said, adding that if the landfill site was having an impact on real estate sales in the area, the data would show longer times for properties on the market or reduced percentages of the asking prices.

However, with consistent sales patterns in the area as revealed by the data, a person cannot draw the conclusion of an adverse impact from the presence of the landfill site, Mr. Lucas said.

Acknowledging that the people in attendance were skeptical of the study, he said that the study dealt with facts, not speculation.

"The one or two exceptions do not make the market," he said, while adding that while he is not saying that no property will be adversely affected by the presence of the landfill site, generally the real estate market in the area is not affected.

The study was also questioned regarding its size, with only 100 properties examined. Mr. Lucas, who said that he has done lots of studies like this, said that using 100 properties for the study was more than enough.

He said that he could have picked 500 properties for the study and the results would have been the same.

Concerns were expressed regarding the study, such as it did not address whether properties in the area had appreciated as much as properties elsewhere, the impact from possible ground water contamination, and the impact from possible future health dangers such as greater risk of cancer. There were also concerns expressed that the study did not take into consideration properties that were taken off the market because they were not selling and that the study did not take into account a change in conditions between the previous study and this one, with the previous study being done when the now-closed landfill site was creating odour problems in the area.

Harold Moore claimed that more extensive studies dealing with property values around landfill sites do show an impact on property values, arguing that all large landfills such as this proposed one on the Carp Road have been shown to have a negative impact on property values.