Jane Forrester Green Space

Photo of author
Published May 9, 2026, edited May 19, 2026
property

Jane Forrester Green Space is a roughly one acre (3,876 m²) property owned by the City of Belleville located at 31 South John St north of Meyers Pier and Harbour Dr next to South George Street boat launch.

The City purchased the property from Shell Gas Corporation on November 28, 1973 for a nominal consideration of $2 due to it being deemed contaminated after it had held fuel storage tanks.

It is part of Jane Forrester Park and zoned “Open Space (OS)”. The green space has views of the Bay of Quinte waterfront and is used by neighbourhood residents for outdoor activities including baseball, dog walking and rugby practice.

See the full timeline.

City says land was contaminated in 1973, but hasn’t provided the details or checked since then (53 years)

The City acquired this property in 1973 from the Shell Gas Corporation for nominal consideration ($0) and it was contaminated. The City has not remediated the site. Only the remediation of the property would amend the value to higher than ($0).

Manager, Realty and Property Services

The City has not provided the 1973 documentation – such as a Ministry of the Environment (MECP) Order or a Record of Site Condition (RSC) – specifying the type and extent of contamination used to justify their $0 valuation. This valuation does not consider five decades of natural environmental degradation, during which time contaminants can migrate, leach or evaporate.

The property is in an area known as Foster Ward located south of the Canadian Pacific Railway tracks to the Bay of Quinte shoreline which was home to coal stacks and oil tanks in the 1800s and early 1900s leading to contamination in the limestone bedrock of a number of properties.

City staff say it has no market value due to contamination

Belleville must follow the process outlined in Bylaw 2022-133 when buying or selling land to ensure transparency and fiscal accountability, including:

  • Pass a motion declaring the property as surplus
  • Notify the public of its intent
  • Get an appraisal done when a piece of City-owned property is being considered

However, the City can skip these requirements if it is designated “Class Three”, which is most commonly applied to small, narrow or landlocked parcels.:

Class Three: Real property which, in the opinion of the Manager Realty and Property Services, has no market value except as a lot addition to one or more abutting properties.

Section 2 (a) (ii), (iii)

They must still declare the property surplus:

Procedures Concerning the Disposition of Land in Class Three

  • a. Declaration as Surplus: The provisions of Section 3.01 apply to the disposition of any land in Class Three.
  • b. Procedures: None of the other requirements of Section 3.00 apply to the disposition of any land in Class Three
Section 5

and can then sell the property via a direct (private) sale directly after receiving an unsolicited proposal:

Procedures Concerning the Disposition of Land in Class Three

Direct sale through approach to the City by interested purchasers or potential purchasers.

Section 7 (a) (vi)

The City is relying on a 50+ year old valuation of $0 to avoid the appraisal process required by Bylaw 2022-133.

Anti-bonusing rule requires public benefit equivalent to the value given to a commercial enterprise

The Anti-Bonusing rule says municipalities must not “assist directly or indirectly” any commercial enterprise by “leasing or selling any property of the municipality at below fair market value” under Section 106 (1) of the Municipal Act.

Courts have historically ruled (Friends of Lansdowne Inc. v. Ottawa (City), 2012) that transferring municipal assets to a commercial enterprise is an illegal “bonus” if it grants an “obvious undue advantage” (an “unmerited windfall”). To determine this, courts use a holistic assessment of the transaction to determine if the municipality can demonstrate that any commercial advantage is merited by a clear, corresponding reasonable and proportional public benefit.

Land requires Quinte Conservation permission to develop

Quinte Conservation’s latest floodplain mapping for the Bay of Quinte shoreline published June 21, 2022 places 41 John Street South and most of the Green Space under the 100 year flood plain:

Development is not permitted within the 100 year floodplain level plus 15 metres without a permit issued by Quinte Conservation Authority as per Section 28 of the Conservation Authorities Act and O. Reg. 41/24:

areas adjacent or close to the shoreline of the Great Lakes-St. Lawrence River System or to inland lakes that may be affected by flooding, erosion or dynamic beach hazards include,

(a) the area starting from the furthest offshore extent of the authority’s boundary to the furthest of the following distances:

  • the 100-year flood level, plus the appropriate allowance for wave uprush, and, if necessary, for other water-related hazards, including ship-generated waves, ice piling and ice jamming, except in respect of Wanapitei Lake in the Nickel District Conservation Authority, the applicable flood event standard for that lake being the one set out in item 1 of Table 16 of Schedule 1,

and

(b) the area that is an additional 15 metres allowance inland from the area described in clause (a).

Section 2 (2) of O. Reg. 41/24 and Section 28 of the Conservation Authorities Act

Green Space would be more valuable if not contaminated or after soil remediation

If the land were not contaminated (or remediated) and zoned for development (eg. residential), its value would be considerably higher than the $0 currently assigned to it.

The transfer bylaw states that if the Green Space is given to the owner of the neighbouring property, the two properties would be merged into one:

Consolidation of Parcels: That the title to the transferred lands merge with those lands owned by the abutting owners. Upon registration of the Transfer, the benefitting owners be required to bring an Application under The Land Titles Act, R.S.O. 1990, as amended, to consolidate the lands acquired with their abutting lands to one Property Identifier Number, at their expense.

By-law 2026-046

The neighbouring property to the north at 41 John St South, Belleville was purchased by the prospective transferee in 2022 for $525,000 and includes a 900 sqft. house and about a quarter acre of land. The Jane Forrester Green Space land is about 4x larger, closer to the water and a portion sits above the 100 year floodplain level. The City says the average cost of the type of remediation required is $300,000 to $500,000.

According to Ontario’s Municipal Property Assessment Corporation (MPAC), the assessed value of the property was $101,000 as of January 1, 2016:

What Belleville’s policies and plans say

Belleville’s Accountability and Transparency Policy passed during the same meeting that the giveaway was first voted on states:

The City will be open, accountable, and transparent to its stakeholders in its financial dealings as required under the Municipal Act. Some examples of how the City provides such Accountability and Transparency are:

• Acquisition and sale of land

Belleville’s adopted 2021 Parkland and Recreation Master Plan states “The City should seek to maximize the supply of available parkland” and identifies the network of waterfront parks including Jane Forrester as critical element of the City’s future tourism and community identity. It recommended that the “City develop an improved disposition policy that includes effective strategy (and consultation) around the merits of disposition in any given circumstance and the criteria which would lead to such a conclusion”.

Belleville’s Official Plan encourages the creation of sufficient affordable and special needs housing to meet the current and future needs of the community and consider the use of surplus lands owned by the municipality for affordable housing (S. 7.15.3 a)).

Belleville’s Real Property Acquisition and Disposition Policy states:

The City of Belleville will acquire and dispose of real property rights in a transparent, fair, reasonable, competitive, and consistent process to ensure the best interests of the City are met.

and

The Manager of Realty and Property Services is responsible for:

  • Ensuring all applicable staff are aware of this policy and of any subsequent revisions
  • Ensuring that all applicable legislative requirements have been met
  • Ensuring compliance with this policy and that the City acts at all times in the best interest of the public, with a view to transparency and fairness of process
  • Ensuring all required information that may affect value or use is obtained from appropriate staff prior to approval of Real Property transactions.
  • Address: 30 South John St, Belleville, ON K8N 3E3
  • PIN: 40477-0092
  • Assessment Roll Number: 120801001515200
  • Legal description: PIN 40477-0092 (LT) Lot 1 & 3, Part Lots 2, 4 & 5, Registered Plan 17, City of Belleville, County of Hastings (South John Street)
  • Area: 3876 m²
  • Zoning: Open Space
  • Owner: City of Belleville

Open Council commentary

The handling of the request to acquire this property raises multiple concerns with respect to the City’s transparency, accountability and decision making processes regarding public land, particularly contaminated properties and green spaces. It presents an opportunity to reflect on the current policies and procedures in place and discuss how we want to change it for the future.

Given the passage of time and uncertainty created by the claims of nearby residents regarding the contamination of the soil, Council should determine the current status of the property or risk failing to account for the evidence before it. If the City gives land to a private interest based on a 50 year old assessment of $0 without a current appraisal, they risk giving away land without public benefit in violation of the Anti-Bonusing rule.

Open Council recommends leaving the Green Space as-is or conducting an Phase I Environmental Site Assessment to determine the current likelihood that one or more contaminants have affected all or part of the property before making a decision affecting the ownership of the property. The decision to dispose of the property should be deferred until a formal project proposal that includes legally binding public benefit conditions is presented by the developer.

Going forward, Council should:

  • Review why the property was not declared surplus in an open meeting as required by Bylaw 2022-133 and open meeting rules in the Municipal Act
  • Review why notice of the City’s intention to dispose of the Surplus Property was not provided as required by the Real Property Acquisition and Disposition Policy
  • Review and enhance the Public Notice Policy as suggested by City staff
  • Review and enhance Bylaw 2022-133 to require public notice for all transfers of public land
  • Review the alleged privacy breach of resident’s personal information to the applicant

Open Council analysis

  • Valuation

    • What is the date and results of the most recent Appraisal used to justify the sale price of $0?

  • Contamination
    • Where is the latest Ministry of the Environment (MECP) Order or Record of Site Condition (RSC)?
    • What kind of contamination was present in 1973? Was it coal tar, oil or gas?
    • What kind of remediation is required?
    • What is the current contamination status of the property?
    • Has the City or transferee conducted recent borehole analysis and if so, what were the findings?
    • Public benefit
      • If public parkland is a “critical element of the City’s future tourism and community identity”, how can it be classified as “disposable surplus land”?
      • What benefit does the public receive in return for giving up access to green space? Do the reasons given for transferring the property extend to all contaminated green space in Belleville?
      • Could anyone simply buy a property next to a much larger contaminated City-owned green space and have it given to them?

    Join our municipal politics Discord