AGENDA - Council - 20040330TOWN OF AURORA
COUNCIL
AGENDA
NO, 04-10
TUESDAY, MARCN 30, 2004
7:00 o m.
COUNCIL CRAMBEN'
AURORA TOWN NALL
PUBLIC RELEASE
26/03/04
TOWN OF AURORA
COUNCIL MEETING AGENDA
NO. 04-10
Tuesday, March 30, 2004
7:00 P.M. OPEN FORUM — COUNCIL MEETING TO FOLLOW
I DECLARATIONS OF PECUNIARY INTEREST
11 APPROVAL OF AGENDA
RECOMMENDED:
THAT the content of the Agenda as circulated by the Corporate Services
Department be approved as presented.
III ADOPTION OF MINUTES
Council Meeting No. 04-08, Tuesday, March 9, 2004
RECOMMENDED:
THAT the Council Minutes of Meeting Number 04-08 be adopted as
printed and circulated.
IV PRESENTATIONS
None
V DETERMINATION OF ITEMS REQUIRING SEPARATE DISCUSSION
V1 ADOPTION OF ITEMS NOT REQUIRING SEPARATE DISCUSSION
Council Meeting No. 04-10
Tuesday, March 30, 2004
Page 2 of 8
Vll DELEGATIONS
None
Vlll CONSIDERATION OF ITEMS REQUIRING SEPARATE DISCUSSION
IX REGIONAL REPORT
X OTHER BUSINESS, COUNCILLORS
XI READING OF BY-LAWS
RECOMMENDED:
THAT the following listed by-laws be given 1st, 2nd and 3rd readings, and
enacted:
4500-04.0 BEING A BY-LAW to (pg. 164)
appoint members to the
Committee of Adjustment.
4502-04.0 BEING A BY-LAW to (pg. 165)
appoint members to the
Property Standards
Committee.
4518-04.0 BEING A BY-LAW to (pg. 166)
Confirm Actions by
Council Resulting From
This Meeting - Tuesday,
March 30, 2004.
Council Meeting No. 04-10 Page 3 of 8
Tuesday, March 30, 2004
X11 IN CAMERA
Legal, Property and Personnel Matters
RECOMMENDED:
THAT Council proceed In Camera to address legal, property and
personnel matters.
Xlll ADJOURNMENT
Council Meeting No. 04-10 Page 4 of 8
Tuesday, March 30, 2004
AGENDA ITEMS
1. PW04-009 — Contract Extension — Street Sweeping (pg. 1)
RECOMMENDED:
THAT Tender No. PW-2001-02 - Supply and Operation of Two or More
Contracted High Dump Street Sweepers with PaveCo Road Builders
Corporation be extended for a one-year period at its original tendered unit
price;
THAT the upset limit of the extended contract be established at $30,000;
and
THAT Council authorize the Mayor and Clerk to sign the attached
Agreement to extend the above contract.
2. PW04-010 — Contract Extension — Pavement Marking (pg. 6)
RECOMMENDED:
THAT Tender No. PW-2001-03 - Pavement Marking of Streets and
Parking Lots with K.D.N. Pavement Markings Ltd. be extended for a one-
year period at its original tendered unit prices;
THAT funds to a net upset limit of $27,000 be authorized for the one-year
extension of Tender No. PW-2001-03;
THAT the 2004 Draft Operating Budget be reduced by $9,000 for
pavement markings; and
THAT Council authorize the Mayor and Clerk to sign the attached
Agreement to extend the above contract.
3. PW04-013 — Award of Tender No. PW-2004-02 - Reconstruction (pg. 11)
of Stoddart Drive
RECOMMENDED:
THAT Tender No. PW-2004-02 the 'Reconstruction of Stoddart Drive", be
awarded to PaveCo Road Builders at its tendered price of $442,189.32;
and
THAT Council authorize the Mayor and Municipal Clerk to execute the
attached Form of Agreement between the Town of Aurora and PaveCo
Road Builders for the reconstruction of Stoddart Drive.
Council Meeting No. 04-10 Page 5 of 8
Tuesday, March 30, 2004
4. PW04-014 — Establishing Speed Limits — Proposed Regional Policy (pg. 18)
RECOMMENDED:
THAT Report No. PW04-014:
• be received as information; and
• forwarded to York Region for their consideration.
5. PW04-015 — Agreements with GO Rail for (pg. 38)
Watermain Crossings of GO Tracks
RECOMMENDED:
THAT upon resolution of the timing issues identified in Report No. PW04-
015 to the satisfaction of the Town Solicitor and the Director of Public
Works, Council authorize the Director of Public Works:
• to sign agreements between the Town of Aurora and the Greater
Toronto Transit Authority for various watermain crossings of the GO
rail tracks on behalf of the Town; and
• to renew these agreements as appropriate, including entering into
new Crossing Agreements that may become necessary in the
future.
6. GSO4-009 — Noise By-law Exemptions for Town Events (pg. 46)
RECOMMENDED:
THAT Council approve an exemption to the Town's Noise By-law for the
2004 Concert Series in the Town Park.
7. PL04-034 — Proposed Natural Heritage Study 2C Planning Area (pg. 49)
RECOMMENDED:
THAT the Terms of Reference for the Natural Heritage Study for the 2C
Planning Area be approved;
THAT a request for proposals to undertake the study be undertaken; and,
THAT the successful proposal be selected and recommended to Council
by a technical steering comprising of representatives from the Planning
Council Meeting No. 04-10
Tuesday, March 30, 2004
Page 6 of 8
Department, Regional Planning and/or Engineering and Works
Department, Ducks Unlimited and the Lake Simcoe Region Conservation
Authority.
8. PL04-035 - Proposed Regional Official Plan Amendment #43 (pg. 62)
Regional Centres and Corridors
(Deferred from March 23, 2004 General Committee)
RECOMMENDED:
THAT Report PL04-035 be received for information; and
THAT notice of the Region's Public Meeting scheduled for April 7th,
concerning Regional OPA # 43 be included on the Town's Notice
Board requesting that comments be provided to both the Region
and the Town on the proposed ROPA # 43; and
THAT a further report be prepared detailing suggested
recommendations prior to the Regional adoption of proposed
ROPA # 43.
9. ADM04-003 - Strategic Planning Process (pg. 68)
(Deferred from March 23, 2004 General Committee)
RECOMMENDED:
THAT the Committee determine whether it wishes to accept one of
the appended third party proposals to facilitate an update the
Strategic Plan; and
THAT the Committee determine whether it wishes to incorporate a
formal community research component undertaken by a research
firm as background to the review.
10. PW04-012 -Wellington Street East between Bayview Avenue and (pg. 135)
Aurora East Pumping Station — Construction of a
Regional Watermain
(Deferred from March 23, 2004 General Committee)
RECOMMENDED:
THAT with respect to the design and construction of the Regional
watermain on Wellington Street East from Bayview Avenue to the
Aurora East Pumping Station, as generally described in Report No.
PW04-012, Council;
Council Meeting No. 04-10
Tuesday, March 30, 2004
Page 7 of 8
• authorize Town Staff to undertake this work on behalf of the
Region; and
• request Town Staff to do this work in conjunction with
Regional Staff.
THAT the Region of York;
• be requested to authorize the Town of Aurora to design and
construct the watermain on Wellington Street East between
Bayview Avenue and the Aurora East Pumping Station as
generally described in Report No. PW04-012; and
• agree that the design and construction of this watermain will
be done at the Region's cost; and
• be requested to fund the design and construction of this
watermain either in 2004 from such surplus funds as may be
available at the end of 2004 in the Region's Capital Budget
or as part of the 2005 Capital Budget.
11. General Committee Meeting Report No. 04-10 (pg. 142)
Tuesday, March 23, 2004
RECOMMENDED:
THAT the Report of the General Committee Meeting No. 04-10 be
received and the recommendations carried by the Committee be adopted.
12. Letter from Nicole Forrester, Canadian High Jump Champion (pg. 149)
Re: Request for Financial Support
(Deferred from March 23, 2004 General Committee)
RECOMMENDED:
THAT Council provide direction on this matter.
Council Meeting No. 04-10 Page 8 of 8
Tuesday, March 30, 2004
13. Letter from Aurora Chamber of Commerce (pg. 158)
Re: Request to Erect Mobile Signs for the
Annual Home & Lifestyle Show
RECOMMENDED:
THAT Council receive and endorse the request from the Aurora Chamber
of Commerce to erect 6 mobile signs within the Town of Aurora from April
12 - 26, 2004, to advertise the 18 n Annual Home & Lifestyle Show which
will take place from April 23rd to the 25tn
14. Notice of Motion from Councillor Kean (pg. 159)
Re: Town Hall and the New Seniors' Centre
and the Naming of a Town Street
RECOMMENDED:
THAT Council approve the name "Civic Way" as the street on which the
Town Hall and the Seniors' Centre are located; and
THAT the street "John West Way" remain as it is, with all other addresses
on that street unchanged.
15. Notice of Motion from Councillor Gaertner (pg. 162)
Re: Youth Centre
RECOMMENDED:
WHEREAS the Town of Aurora has committed to providing a Youth
Centre; and
WHEREAS a process must be established that will lead to a viable Youth
Centre; I propose
THAT this process commence with the establishment of the new Leisure
Services Advisory Committee.
A TOWN OF AURORA AGENDA ITEM #
COUNCIL REPORT No. PW04-009
SUBJECT: Contract Extension —Street Sweeping
FROM: W. H. Jackson, Director of Public Works
DATE: March 30, 2004
RECOMMENDATIONS
THAT Tender No. PW-2001-02 - Supply and Operation of Two or More Contracted
High Dump Street Sweepers with Paveco Road Builders Corporation be extended for
a one-year period at its original tendered unit price;
THAT the upset limit of the extended contract be established at $30,000; and
THAT Council authorize the Mayor and Clerk to sign the attached Agreement to
extend the above contract.
BACKGROUND
Paveco Road Builders Corporation's (Paveco) contract to supply and operate street
sweepers to remove winter sand and debris in the spring from the Town's streets expired
on March 1, 2004. The terms of the contract allow for a one-year extension based on the
original tendered unit price.
COMMENTS
1.0 Sweeping
1.1 Timing
Spring sweeping normally commences in the first half of April with a targeted
completion date by the Victoria Day weekend in May. Start and completion times
are directly influenced by the weather and the amount of sand used during the
previous immediate winter.
1.2 Material Collected
Winter sand and assorted debris
is collected
in the spring by both Town
and
contracted sweepers, all of which
is stockpiled
in the Public Works Yard.
This
000001
March 30, 2004 - 2 - Report No. PW04-009
material is then screened and trucked to various sites as fill material.
1.3 Assignment
Of the Town's total current road inventory, two contracted sweepers are assigned
approximately 70%, with the one Town sweeper assigned the remaining 30%. Any
additional growth in the Town's road infrastructure is normally assigned to the
contractor.
1.4 Additional Sweeping
The Town sweeper does any additional sweeping required outside of the spring
season.
2.0 Contract
2.1 Extension
Although the original contract is for three years and expired March 1, 2004, the
contract identifies that:
`At the end of the initial three (3) year period the Town, at its
discretion, may extend the existing Contract for a further one (1) year
period, based on the tendered unit prices, with no price escalation or
additional costs considered."
This clause is inserted in similar Public Works tenders to provide staff an
opportunity to review effectiveness of the current program with respect to changes
in technology, prices and service levels.
2.2 Proposed Increase in Overall Tender Cost
The tendered unit price ($60.00/hr.) has remained the same for the past three
years, and will remain the same for the proposed one-year extension. It is
anticipated that the overall tender cost will increase, however, as it has in the past
due to increases in road inventory and winter events (which requires more sand).
Contracted street sweeping costs has been in the order of $11,000, $16,000 and
$28,000 for 2001, 2002 and 2003 respectively.
The frequency and amount of spring rains also influences the cost of sweeping
operations. Generally a less than average spring rainfall accumulation will increase
the amount of sand and debris to be swept as more material remains on the road
and less is deposited into the storm catchbasins. Savings in sweeping operations
000002
March 30, 2004 - 3 - Report No. PW04-009
may be realized if a more than average spring rainfall accumulation is experienced,
however, these savings would then be offset by the anticipated increase in
catchbasin cleaning operations.
Based on actual expenditures of approximately $28,000 in 2003 due to the above
noted factors, it is proposed to increase the upset limit for the contract extension to
$30,000. Funds to accommodate this increased expenditure have been included in
the 2004 Operating Budget estimate.
2.3 Commentary
Spring street sweeping is an essential component of the Department's winter
services that cannot be eliminated from our maintenance program without adverse
results. As noted above, what the street sweepers do not pick up ends up in the
catchbasins or, worst case, storm water detention ponds and watercourses. As can
be appreciated, the cost to remove the winter sand increases substantially if the
street sweepers do not pick it up.
With the Department's existing equipment (one street sweeper which doubles as a
vacuum excavator), the Town could not be swept in less than 5 months. By the
time the 5 months had passed, a significant portion of the winter sand would be in
the catchbasins and residents of the Town would be displeased with the sand and
dust that was still on the roads. This was experienced last year when snow delayed
the street sweeping program by several weeks, and numerous complaints regarding
dust and sand were received.
For Council's further information, it is noted that Paveco provides contracted street
sweeping services for a number of other area municipalities. Paveco has been
requested to begin sweeping the first week in April (weather permitting), upon
Council approval of this report. If this approval is delayed, Paveco will take their
services to other locations and return to the Town when they have an opening in
their schedule that, in all likelihood, will be later than we desire.
OPTIONS
Council may direct staff to prepare a new tender call. In this instance, there is the potential
for increased unit costs and a delay in street sweeping for this year.
FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS
Sufficient funds have been allocated in the proposed 2004 Public Works Operating Budget
currently before Council to allow for the increase in overall sweeping costs.
000003
March 30, 2004 - 4 - Report No. PW04-009
LINK TO STRATEGIC PLAN
Goal ""A" speaks to maintaining a well -managed and fiscally responsible municipality
supported by the Long Term Strategy of reviewing practices for the contracting out of
services if such processes can result in obtaining efficiencies and monetary savings.
ATTACHMENTS
• Agreement Extension between Paveco and Town
PRE -SUBMISSION REVIEW
Management Team Meeting - March 24, 2004
Prepared by. Ken Lauppe, Manager of Operations Services, ext. 3442
W. H. J
Director of Public Works
000004
AGREEMENT ADDENDUM
THE CORPORATION OF THE TOWN OF AURORA
DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS
THIS AGREEMENT made in triplicate this 30 th day of March A.D. 2004.
BETWEEN:
and -
The Corporation of the Town of Aurora
(hereinafter called "Aurora')
Paveco Road Builders Corp.
(hereinafter called "Paveco")
of the First Part
of the Second Part
WHEREAS on March 5, 2001 Aurora entered into an agreement with Paveco for the
supply and operation of two (2) or more contracted high dump street sweepers by Paveco for a
period of three (3) years, in accordance with Tender No. PW-2001-02; and
WHEREAS on March 30, 2004 the Council of Aurora approved an additional one (1) year
extension, in accordance with Tender No. PW-2001-02; and
NOW THEREFORE this Addendum witnesseth that, in consideration of the mutual
covenants and agreements herein contained, the parties hereto agree as follows:
1. The Agreement is hereby extended from March 1, 2004 to March 1, 2005; and
2. All obligations in accordance with the Agreement and Tender will remain in full force and
effect.
IN WITNESSETH WHEREOF Aurora and Paveco have hereunto affixed their corporate seals
under the hands of its respective signing officers.
THE CORPORATION OF PAVECO ROAD BUILDERS CORP.
THE TOWN OF AURORA
Tim Jones, Mayor
Bob Panizza, Municipal Clerk
(We have authority to bind the Corporation.)
Mike Crupi
(I have authority to bind the Corporation.)
000005
[AGENDA ITEM #
TOWN OF AURORA
COUNCIL REPORT No. PW04-010
SUBJECT: Contract Extension —Pavement Marking
FROM: W. H. Jackson, Director of Public Works
DATE: March 30, 2004
RECOMMENDATIONS
THAT Tender No. PW-2001-03 - Pavement Marking of Streets and Parking Lots with
K.D.N. Pavement Markings Ltd. be extended for a one-year period at its original
tendered unit prices;
THAT funds to a net upset limit of $27,000 be authorized for the one-year extension
of Tender No. PW-2001-03;
THAT the 2004 Draft Operating Budget be reduced by $9,000 for pavement markings;
and
THAT Council authorize the Mayor and Clerk to sign the attached Agreement to
extend the above contract.
BACKGROUND
The contract with K.D.N. Pavement Marking Ltd. (K.D.N.) to supply and place pavement
markings on the Town's streets and parking lots expires on May 1, 2004. The terms of the
contract allow for a one-year extension based on the original tendered unit prices.
COMMENTS
1.0 Markings
1.1 Timing
Placement of pavement markings commences shortly after completion of the street
sweeping program (normally by the Victoria Day weekend in May), and is completed
by the end of June. Start and completion times are influenced by the weather and
the sweeping program.
The majority of the placement of pavement markings is done after 11:00 pm and
March 30, 2004 - 2 - Report No. PW04-010
completed by 6:00 am on weeknights to cause minimal disruption to traffic. This is
a moving operation in most instances, and accordingly, disruption to residents is
minimal.
This is an annual program that, for the most part, involves refreshing existing
markings.
1.2 TVpe
Pavement markings consist of both painted and plastic and are used to delineate
the following:
Centreline;
Turning arrows;
Stop bars;
Crosswalks; and
Parking spaces.
Painted markings are done annually to maintain visibility. Plastic markings, while
several times more expensive, have a longer lifespan and are replaced every 5-7
years. The type of markings used is dependent upon traffic volumes and staff
continually monitor marking performance to maximize cost efficiencies.
2.0 Contract
2.1 Extension
Although the original contract is for three years and expires May 1, 2004, the
contract identifies that:
"At the end of the initial three (3) year period, the Town at its
discretion may extend the existing Contract for a further one (1) year
period, based on the tendered unit prices, with no price escalation or
additional costs considered."
This clause is inserted in similar Public Works tenders to provide staff an
opportunity to review effectiveness of the current program with respect to changes
in technology, prices, and service levels.
2.2 Proposed Increase in Overall Tender Cost
The tendered unit prices have remained the same for the past three years, and will
remain the same for the proposed one-year extension. It is anticipated that the
overall tender cost will increase as the road inventory increases.
00000
March 30, 2004 - 3 - Report No. PW04-010
In 2003, almost $29,000 (net) was spent on pavement marking. Funds, in addition
to this, were spent to install pavement marking on reconstructed roads or new
subdivision roads. In these instances, the cost of the pavement marking is
recovered from the specific capital project orthe appropriate developer respectively.
For 2004, the net pavement marking estimate is $34,500.
2.3 Commentary
It should be understood that pavement marking, except for limited applications (ie.
pedestrian crossovers, railway crossings) serve an advisory or warning function and
do not have legal force of their own nor are they legally required.
Accordingly, Council has, within its purview, the ability to reduce the cost of this
activity by eliminating certain markings. Examples of pavement marking that could
be eliminated would include stop bars and pedestrian crossing lines at local, low
volume intersections and centrelines on noncurvilinear sections of road. It is
estimated that elimination of these markings would reduce our pavement markings
cost in the order of 25% or $9,000.
We have consulted with representatives of Newmarket and we understand that the
types of pavement markings noted above are not painted in their municipality.
Based on this information, staff is of the opinion the funding for pavement marking
can be reduced within the 2004 budget estimate by $9,000 without adversely
impacting traffic operations. This program will be reviewed further during this
summer to ascertain if any other changes are warranted.
It is further noted that this function cannot be efficiently provided by in-house staff
specifically because of the cost to acquire the specialized equipment and the
relatively short time this equipment would be used each year.
OPTIONS
Council may direct staff to:
• Prepare a new tender call; or
• Extend the existing contract with additional funding to that recommended in this
report.
FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS
If the recommendations of this report are adopted, the 2004 Draft Operating Budget can be
reduced by $9,000.
March 30, 2004 - 4 - Report No. PW04-010
If Council wishes, however, to maintain the same level of pavement marking as in 2003,
the 2004 Draft Budget estimate presented to General Committee at its meeting of March
23, 2004 should remain as presented.
CONCLUSIONS
The recommended one-year contract extension will provide continued acceptable service
delivery by the Town's contractor and the unit prices continue to be among the lowest in
York Region.
LINK TO STRATEGIC PLAN
Goal A — To Maintain A Well Managed And Fiscally Responsible A Municipality is identified
as a complimentary link to this report and is supported by Long Term Strategy No. 6 —
Review practices for the contracting out of services if such processes can result in
obtaining efficiencies and monetary savings.
ATTACHMENTS
Agreement Extension between K.D.N. and Town
PRE -SUBMISSION REVIEW
Management Team Meeting - March 24, 2004
Prepared by, Ken Lauppe, Manager of Operations Services, ext. 3442
ZL
W. H. Jac
Director of Public Works
000009
AGREEMENT ADDENDUM
THE CORPORATION OF THE TOWN OF AURORA
DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS
THIS AGREEMENT made in triplicate this 30 th day of March A.D. 2004.
BETWEEN:
- and -
The Corporation of the Town of Aurora
(hereinafter called "Aurora")
K.D.N. Pavement Markings Ltd.
(hereinafter called "K.D.N.")
of the First Part
of the Second Part
WHEREAS on May 8, 2001 Aurora entered into an agreement with K.D.N. for the supply
and installation of pavement markings of streets and parking lots by K.D.N. for a period of three
(3) years, in accordance with Tender No. PW-2001-03; and
WHEREAS on March 30, 2004 the Council of Aurora approved an additional one (1) year
extension, in accordance with Tender No. PW-2001-03; and
NOW THEREFORE this Addendum witnesseth that, in consideration of the mutual
covenants and agreements herein contained, the parties hereto agree as follows:
1. The Agreement is hereby extended from May 1, 2004 to May 1, 2005; and
2. All obligations in accordance with the Agreement and Tender will remain in full force and
effect.
IN WITNESSETH WHEREOF Aurora and K.D.N. have hereunto affixed their corporate seals
under the hands of its respective signing officers.
THE CORPORATION OF K.D.N. PAVEMENT MARKINGS LTD.
THE TOWN OF AURORA
rim Jones, Mayor
Bob Panizza, Municipal Clerk
(We have authority to bind the Corporation.)
William George
(I have authority to bind the Corporation.)
Q0,001O
AGENDA ITEM # J
A TOWN OF AURORA
COUNCIL REPORT No. PW04-013
SUBJECT: Award of Tender No. PW-2004-02 -Reconstruction of Stoddart Drive
FROM: W. H. Jackson, Director of Public Works
DATE: March 30. 2004
RECOMMENDATIONS
THAT TenderNo. PW-2004-02 the "Reconstruction of Stoddart Drive", be awarded to
PaveCo Road Builders at its tendered price of $442,189.32; and
THAT Council authorize the Mayor and Municipal Clerk to execute the attached Form
of Agreement between the Town of Aurora and PaveCo Road Builders for the
reconstruction of Stoddart Drive.
BACKGROUND
Council at its meeting of February 10, 2004 in considering Report PW04-006 resolved:
"THAT the existing sidewalk on Stoddart Drive remain as is;
THAT staff finalize the drawings and tender documents for the reconstruction
of Stoddart Drive without any change to the existing sidewalk except for the
replacement of cracked and/or damaged sidewalk bays as necessary, -
THAT Council approve the reconstruction of Stoddart Drive in advance of
approval of the remainder of the 2004 Capital Budget; and
THAT staff be directed to report to Council with the results of the tendering
process."
In consideration of the above, the project was tendered on February 20, 2004.
COMMENTS
Protect Description
This project involves the reconstruction of Stoddart Drive including the
reconstruction/replacement of the watermain, road, curb and gutter.
Stoddart Drive is currently constructed to an urban cross-section, with some sidewalk,
curb, gutter and storm sewer. The reconstructed layout of this street will be fundamentally
the same as the existing layout.
000011
March 30, 2004 - 2 - Report No. PW04-013
Tender Process
On Friday, March 5, 2004, the Tender Opening Committee opened 10 tenders for the
reconstruction of Stoddart Drive. The tender prices were as follows:
PaveCo Road Builders
Direct Underground
Corm Construction Sewer & Watermain Ltd.
F.C.M. Construction Ltd.
Esposito Bros. Construction Ltd.
Trisan Construction
Miwell Construction Ltd.
Hollingworth Construction Comp.
Elirpa Construction & Materials
Dig -Con International
A total of 13 companies purchased the tender documents.
$ 442,189.32
$ 467,744.90
$ 535,184.07
$ 536,032.75
$ 537,413.44
$ 566,541.70
$ 576,000.00
$ 584,019.00
$ 586,068.72
$ 648,738.00
The Tender was issued by the Town's Treasury Department and advertised according to
the requirements of the Town's standard purchasing procedures.
Project Costs
Project cost for the reconstruction of Stoddart Drive is estimated as follows based on the
PaveCo Road Builders bid:
Road Account
Water Account
Storm Account
Total
Tender Price
$203,073.75
$181,884.39
$20,158.32
$405,116.46
G.S.T.
$6,092.21
$5,456.53
$604.75
$12,153.49
Engineering &
Inspection
$2,500.00
$2,500.00
$500.00
$5,500.00
Contingency
$18,580.92
$16,645.71
$1,846.23
$37,072.86
Total
$230,246.88
$206,486.63
$23,109.30
$459,842.81
Budget Totals
$291,000.00
$255,000.00
$25,000.00
$571,000.00
Estimated
Variances
(Incl. Contingency)
$60,753.12
$48,513.37
$1,890.70
$111,157.19
As can be seen, all components of this project are under budget.
It is noted that the analysis of the bids revealed that the PaveCo Road Builders bid is still
the lowest bid if the contingencies are not included in the calculations.
000012
March 30, 2004 - 3 - Report No. PW04-013
OPTIONS
Council may decide to not reconstruct Stoddart Drive.
FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS
Funds have been allocated in the 2004 Capital Works Budget and pre -approved by Council
on February 10, 2004 in the amount of $291,000 for road construction, $255,000 for
watermain construction, and $25,000 for storm sewer construction.
The roads part of the tender is $60,753.12 under budget, the watermain portion is
$48,513.37 under budget and the storm sewer portion is $1,890.70 under budget. Overall,
the entire project is under budget by $111,157.19.
CONCLUSIONS
There has been an extensive public information campaign associated with the
reconstruction of Stoddart Drive. Informational letters, a survey, an open house and
conversations with directly affected homeowners have, it is believed, produced a design
that is both functional and responsive to the wishes of the residents.
The tendered price from PaveCo Road Builders is $25,555.58 lower than the second bid
and is $105,803.87 lower than the average bid. Accordingly, it is believed the tendered
price submitted by PaveCo Road Builders is a very competitive price.
In consideration of the above, it is suggested that the Tender submitted by the PaveCo
Road Builders be accepted.
LINK TO STRATEGIC PLAN
Goal "A" speaks to maintaining a well -managed and fiscally responsible municipality,
including the reduction of operating costs by setting priorities and focusing on core
services.
ATTACHMENTS
2004 Capital Budget Sheet
Form of Agreement 0 P.W.2004-02
Site Plan showing site of proposed reconstruction
PRE -SUBMISSION REVIEW
Management Team Meeting — March 24, 2004
Prepared b : Jerry Kryst, Technical Assistant, Ext. 4376
W. H. Jaqksa
Director of Public Works
000013
TOWN OF AURORA
2004 CAPITAL BUDGET
ANALYSIS BY PROJECT
DEPARTMENT: Public Works Department
PROJECT: Reconstruction of Stoddart Drive
PURPOSE: To provide funding for the reconstruction of the roadway and watermain
infrastructure
PERFORMANCE/ACTIVITY MEASURES
INCREASE (DECREASE)
the reconstruction of this infrastructure should lessen maintenance activities
EFFECT ON FUTURE OPERATING BUDGETS 2004 2005 2006
INCREASE (DECREASE)
SALARIES $500 $500 $500
OTHER COSTS $500 $500 $500
TOTAL $1000 $1000 $1000
PROJECT COST/FINANCING
TOTAL PROJECT COST $571,000
FINANCING:
CURRENT LEVY $291,000
GRANTS
RESERVE FUND - Water/Sewer $255,000
- Storm $25,000
OTHER
TOTAL FINANCING $571,000
EXPLANATIONS/HIGHLIGHTS:
Costs for roadworks and underground infrastructure are as per preliminary cost estimate by design
consultant, and have been updated from the costs contained in the 10-Year Capital Plan. Some works are
required on the storm sewer system due to the reconstruction of the road.
PART 3
FORM OF AGREEMENT
THE CORPORATION OF THE TOWN OF AURORA
PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT
TENDER NO. P.W. 2004-02
THIS AGREEMENT made (in triplicate) this day of AD 2004
BETWEEN:
The Corporation of the Town of Aurora
hereinafter called the "OWNER"
of the First Part
and
PaveCo Road Builders Corporation
hereinafter called the "CONTRACTOR"
of the Second Part
WHEREAS the Tender of the Contractor respecting the construction work,
hereinafter referred to and described, as accepted by the Owner on the
day of 2004 .
THEREFORE THIS AGREEMENT WITNESSETH that in consideration of the
premises and the covenants hereinafter contained, the Parties hereto agree as follows:
1. The Contractor hereby covenants and agrees to provide and supply at the
Contractor's own expense, all and every kind of labour, appliances, equipment, and
materials for, and to undertake and complete in strict accordance with this Tender
Document dated March 5. 2004 prepared for the Town of Aurora Public Works
Department, all of which said Documents are annexed hereto and form part of this
agreement to the same extent as if fully embodied herein at and for the price or sum of
$405,116.46
2. A contingency allowance in the amount of $37,072.86 has been provided in the
event that extra work is required to be performed by the Contractor.
3. The Contractor further covenants and agrees to undertake and perform the said
work in a proper work like manner under the supervision and direction and to the
complete satisfaction of the Owner within the period of time specified in the Form of
Tender.
4. The Contractor further covenants and agrees that the Contractor will at all times,
indemnify and save harmless the Owner, the Owners officers, servants, and agents
from and against all loss or damage, and from and against all actions, suits, claims and
demands whatsoever which may be made or brought against the Owner, the Owners
officers, servants, and agents by reason or in consequence of the execution and
performance or maintenance of the said work by the Contractor, the Contractor's
servants, agents or employees.
FORM OF AGREEMENT (Cont'd)
5. The Contractor further covenants and agrees to furnish in accordance with the
000015
Tender P.W.-2004-02 2
above specification, a Performance Bond in an amount equivalent to one hundred
percent (100%) of the contract price approved by the Owner's Solicitor, guaranteeing
the faithful performance of the said work, in accordance with the terms of this
Agreement.
6. The Owner hereby covenants and agrees that if the said work shall be duly and
properly executed and materials provided as aforesaid and if the Contractor shall carry
out, perform and observe all of the requirements and conditions of this agreement, the
Owner will pay the Contractor the contract price herein set forth in the Contractor's
Tender, such payment or payments to be made in accordance with the provisions of the
General Conditions of the Contract referred to above.
7. This agreement and everything herein contained shall ensure to the benefit of
and be binding upon the Parties hereto, their successors and assigns, respectively.
8. All communications in writing between the parties or between them and the
Engineer shall be deemed to have been received by the addressee if delivered to the
Individual or to a member of the firm or to an officer of the Corporation for whom they
are intended or if sent by post, telegram or facsimile addressed as follows:
THE OWNER: CORPORATION OF THE TOWN OF AURORA
100 John West Way
P.O. Box 1000
Aurora, Ontario
L4G 6J1 FAX: 905-841-7119
THE CONTRACTOR: PAVECO ROAD BUILDERS CORP.
94 Newkirk Road
Richmond Hill, Ontario
L4C 3G3 FAX: 905-737-1063
IN WITNESS WHEREOF the parties hereto have hereunto affixed their
corporate seals duly attested by the hands of their proper officers in that behalf
respectively.
CONTRACTOR
OWNER
Mayor, T. Jones
Clerk, Bob Panizza, A.M.C.T.
000016
FA WAY DR.
LEGEND
PROPOSED ROAD RECONSTRUCTION
APPENDON 0° °N
PLAN SHOO WOM LOOC A70 00H OF PROO JGC 7
PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT FEBRUARY 2004
000%dli i
AGENDA ITEM #
TOWN OF AURORA
COUNCIL REPORT No. PW04-014
SUBJECT: Establishing Speed Limits —Proposed Regional Policy
FROM: W. H. Jackson, Director of Public Works
DATE: March 30, 2004
RECOMMENDATIONS
THAT Report No. PW04-014:
• be received as information; and
forwarded to York Region for their consideration.
BACKGROUND
On February 25, 2004, staff received the attached report entitled "Establishing Speed
Limits — Proposed Regional Policy" from the Regional Clerk requesting our comments prior
to consideration of this matter at the April 7, 2004 Regional Transportation and Works
Committee meeting.
Proposed Regional Policy
In 2003, York Region hired an independent consultant to:
• Review the Region's current process for establishing speed limits on Regional
roads;
• To make recommendations for changes to the Region existing process; and
• To established a warrant system for the establishment of speed limits.
The Region's existing practice, which was initiated in 1999, relates the physical
characteristics and/or attributes of the roadway to a speed limit. However, based on on-
going discussions with the public and elected representatives, Regional staff felt there was
a need to review this process. Regional staff was particularly concerned about speed limits
in school areas.
Overall, the report found that drivers travel at a certain speed based on the characteristics
and design elements of the roadway and that reducing the posted speed limit below the
85Th percentile speed has almost no effect unless the roadway receives constant police
enforcement. Accordingly, setting a speed limit below the 85Th percentile speed has the
060018
March 30, 2004 -2- Report No. PW04-014
effect of penalizing drivers who are driving at the comfort level of the roadway. Various
different warrants and procedures from different jurisdictions for establishing speed limits
were evaluated. The new proposed policy combines the more effective components of
some of the existing techniques used today to establish what is felt to be a credible,
technically sound and consistent method of determining an appropriate posted speed limit
for a Regional roadway.
In essence, the proposed policy sets the posted speed limit on a Regional road at the 85Th
percentile speed to a maximum of 80km/hr. The proposed speed limit will then be
reduced by a maximum of 20km/hr depending upon such factors as driveway density,
vehicle -pedestrian volumes and in some cases the pavement condition (at least until the
road surface condition can be restored to an acceptable level). The desired length of a
rural area speed zone was identified as 2 kilometres with 1 kilometre set as the minimum.
For urban areas, a 1 kilometre long speed zone is desired with a minimum of 500 meters
noted.
Speed limits in School Zones on a Regional road take into consideration the above noted
factors but also include the collision history. Under the proposed policy, a request to
reduce a posted speed limit in the vicinity of a school will only be considered if coming from
the Principal of the school or the School Board. Qualifying schools will then be ranked
based on priority points from highest to lowest.
As Council is aware, there are six Regional roads in Aurora and the impacts of the speed
limit policy could directly affect the Town.
Staff Comments
Staff commends the Region for its efforts in trying to establish criteria and procedures to
deal with this matter. There are numerous stakeholders that are affected by the
establishment of speed limits and creating a balance among these groups is very difficult.
It is also understood that the operating characteristics of Regional roads are significantly
different that those of local municipal roads. Nevertheless, we have reviewed the Regional
report and offer the following comments:
1. The proposed policy fails to mention the option to raise the existing posted
speed limit of a Regional road if it is found to be inappropriate given the
prevailing conditions.
2. The proposed policy takes into consideration pedestrians crossing the street and
walking along the side of the roadway. There is, however, no mention of cyclists,
who, it is believed, should be included in the policy.
3. The proposed policy states that a speeding concern within a school zone can only
come from the Principal of the school or the School Board. It is unclear why the
OCCO19
March 30, 2004 - 3 - Report No. PW04-014
request cannot come from Municipal staff or concerned parents.
4. The proposed policy notes that a priority points system will be used to rank
qualifying schools. It is unclear why this ranking system is suggested and what the
implications of this ranking are.
5. The report indicates that the road characteristics and design elements determine
what traveling speeds drivers will travel at based on their comfort level. The report
also indicates that unless the characteristics of the roadway are changed the 85T"
percentile speed will remain the same regardless of the posted speed limit. Was
consideration given during the development of the speed limit policy to the
implementation ofstreetscape ortraffic calming measures that would alter the road
characteristics thereby leading to a reduced speed profile?
6. Within the proposed policy, the collision history of a road is only noted in regard to
school zone speed limits. Should not the collision history of a road be a part of all
speed limit reviews?
OPTIONS
None.
FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS
None.
CONCLUSIONS
Establishing a policy for setting speed limits on Regional Roadways will create a credible,
technically sound and consistent method of determining an appropriate posted speed limit.
The Town supports the Region's initiative to update their existing process and requests
that the Town's comments be considered during the finalization of the Regional Speed
Limit Policy.
LINK TO STRATEGIC PLAN
Goal "C" speaks to continuing the well -planned moderate growth of the Town. This goal is
supported by the "Strategic Action" stating that Council will "incorporate measures into
Town policies and programs which contribute to a safe living and working environment".
The newly updated Strategic Plan includes the action to "address matters affecting public
safety, property and the environment and will formulate specific measures to deal with
them."
OOGil OF 0
March 30, 2004 - 4 - Report No. PW04-014
ATTACHMENTS
Regional Report "Establishing Speed Limits — Proposed Regional Policy"
PRE -SUBMISSION REVIEW
Management Team Meeting - March 24, 2004
Prepared by. Brent Jefferson, Traffic/Transportation Analyst, ext. 4374
w"on,W. H
Director of Public Works
6601?1
F 1-25-2004 09:47 YORK REGION
905 895 3031 P.01
FACSIMILE TRANSMISSION
CarftnamSemrecDgWM=
Clue t1 BvonlClah
Pharr (905) 830.4444 Exc 1300
Far. (905) 895-3031
To: Mr. Bob Panizza, Director, Corporate Services/Municipal Clerk
Town of Aurora
Fax: (905)726-4732
From: Denis Kelly, Regional Clerk
Date: February 25, 2004
Re: Establishing Speed Limits
Proposed Regional Policy
Number of Pages (including Fax Transmittal Sheet): 16
CORP. SP)"VI:.:ES DEPT.
COPIES CIRCULATED TO:
C.A.O.
Dir. Of Building Admin.
Fire Chief
Dir. Of Leisure Services
Dir. Of Planning
Din of Public Works
❑ URGENT ❑ FOR REVIEW ❑ PRIVATE AND CONFIDENTIAL
❑ PLEASE REPLY a AS PER YOUR REQUEST x FOR YOUR INFORMATION
CONFIDENTIALITY NOTE
The information contained in this transmission is confidential and intended only for the use of the individual
or entity to whom it is addressed. If you have received this transmission in error, please notify us
Immediately by telephone and return the original transmission to us by mail without making a copy. Thank
you for your assistance.
The RagmdMwna%GtygrYmk,17250YorwSowNeromrke;Oi#ani L3Y6Z1
7d• (905) 895-1231, 1-877-GO4•YCRK(1.877464-9675), Fax: (903) 895-xxxx)
rrrw,& �,mk.4,0 - (!0001)2
Otte of the Regional Clerk
Corporate Servim Department
February 24, 2004
Mr, Bob Panizza
Director, Corporate Services/Municipal Clerk
Town of Aurora
P.O. Box 1000,
Aurora, Ontario
L4Cr 6J1
100 John West Way
Dear Mr. Panizza:
Re; Establishing Speed Limits
Proposed Regional Policy
The Council of the Regional Municipality of York, at its meeting held on Thursday, February 19,
2004 adopted, as amended, the attached Clause No. 3, Report No. 2 of the Transportation and:
Works Committee.
Regional Council amended Clause 3 by referring it back to the Transportation and Works
Committee for consideration at its April 7, 2004 meeting and requested that it be forwarded to
the local municipalities for their comments prior to consideration by the Committee.
Would you please provide your comments to the Kees Schipper, Commissioner of
Transportation and Works, as soon as possible in order that they may be considered at the April
7, 2004 Transportation and Works Committee meeting.. A copy of Clause No. 3, Report No. 2 of
the Transportation and Works Committee is attached for your information.
Sincerely,
Denis Kelly
Weerkmg
Attachment
Copy to: Commissioner of Transportation and Works
T1x Regional Municipality of York, 17250 Yonge Street, Newmarket, Ontario L3Y 6ZI
Tel. 90 -830.4444 Ext. 1320, 1-977-GO4-YORK, Farr 905-895-3031
Internet: wwwregiov.york.on.to
(IN043
FE9-25-2004 09:47 YORK REGION
905 695 3031 P.03
40i
/
Clause No. 3 in Report No. 2 of the Transportation and Works Committee was adopted,
as amended, by the Council of The Regional Municipality of York at its meeting on
February 19, 2004.
(Regional Council at its meeting on February 19, 2004, referred the foregoing
Clause back to the Committee for consideration at its April7, 2004 meeting and
be forwarded to the local municipalitles for their comments prior to consideration
by the Committee.)
3
ESTABLISHING SPEED LIMITS
PROPOSED REGIONAL POLICY
The Transportation and Works Committee recommends the adoption of the
recommendations contained in the following report, January 21, 2004, from the
Commissioner of Transportation and Works, subject to amending
Recommendation 2 to read as follows:
"2. A copy of this report be forwarded by the Regional Clerk to the Clerks of each
of the local municipalities, the York Region District School Board and York
Catholic District School Board "
RECOMMENDATIONS
it is recommended that:
1. The Speed Limit Policy attached to this report as Attachment I be adopted by
Regional Council as the policy for establishing speed limits on the Regional road
network.
2, A copy of this report be forwarded by the Regional Clerk to the Clerks of each of the
local municipalities.
2. PURPOSE
The Regional Municipality of York routinely undertakes reviews of speed limits. These
reviews are generally initiated by requests from the public or elected representatives and
the ongoing monitoring of the road network. Regardless of the reason for the
investigation, there is a need for a credible, technically sound and consistent method of
determining an appropriate speed limit.
This report discusses the results of an assignment undertaken by an independent
consultant to review the current process for establishing speed limits and makes
recommendations for changes to the process and establishes a warrant. The proposed new
warrant will, if adopted, consider the 85"' percentile speed of the roadway,
vehicle -pedestrian collision risk, school areas and speed -related collision information.
000014
FED-25-2004 09:47 YORK REGION
905 895 j0:51 F'.04
Clause No. 3
Report No. 2
Transportation and Works Committee
3. BACKGROUND
The Region attempts to set speed limits that maximize safety, decrease delay, lower the
burden of enforcement and meet public expectations. The task is complex as safety and
delays are often competing objectives, and public opinion is polarized. Residents and
vulnerable road users seek lower speed limits that promote quality of life for the
community and increased security for pedestrians and cyclists. Motorists seek higher
speeds that minimize travel time, and seemingly have no significant negative impacts on
them.
Regional staffs existing practice in establishing posted speed limits was initiated in
December of 1999. This practice involved relating the physical characteristics/attributes
of the roadway to a speed limit. This method was developed to provide consistency and
uniformity of posted speed limits on similar type roadway cross -sections. However,
based upon the on -going discussions with the public and elected representatives,
Regional staff determined that there was a need to review the process in establishing
speed limits and make recommendations for changes to the process and establish a
warrant. Of particular concern that needed to be addressed was the reduction of speed
limits in school areas,
An independent consultant was retained to develop a procedure for setting speed limits
on Regional roads. Regional facilities are typically arterial roadways in both urban and
rural settings with various adjacent land use, traffic and physical features. The
recommended procedure needed to be technically sound, consistent with the broader
objectives of the transportation system, credible to the public and defensible in any forum
of debate.
4. ANALYSIS AND OPTIONS
Maximum speed limits are laws, and as with most laws, speed limits are established for
the protection of the public and the regulation of unreasonable behaviour on the part of
individuals. Over the years, speed limits have been enacted for essentially three reasons:
• Safety
• Energy conservation
• Environmental protection
It is clear that energy conservation and environmental protection will only impact on
speed limit setting in very extreme circumstances. By far, the prominent reason for speed
limits is safety. Of late, urban speed limits have also been revised in response to public
concerns about the impacts that fast-moving vehicles have on cycling and walking
00001'5
FEB-25-2004 09:47 YORK REGION 905 695 3031 F'.05
Clause No. 3
Report No. 2
Transportation and Works Committee
comfort and safety, school areas, and on the "sense of place" on shopping and residential
streets. The last reason is an emerging social issue in York Region and elsewhere.
Many municipalities and agencies have started to look at the development of warrant
criteria to more appropriately address today's issues around speed limits. The following
summarizes the findings of the consultant's study.
4.1 Goals and Objectives
The goal of a surface transportation system is to provide safe, convenient, affordable,
efficient and energy -conserving transportation while minimizing the impact on the
environment. Setting speed limits is a strategy employed by municipalities in achieving
this goal. Therefore, the setting of speed limits on Regional roads should be in
conformance with this overarching goal.
The difficulty is that many of the desired features of the transportation system are
essentially competing objectives. For example, efficiency might be promoted through
high speed limits that permit motor vehicle travel times to be minimized. However,
higher speeds negatively impact safety by increasing collision severity. The speed limit
should be selected so as to balance the objectives.
The objectives of setting speed limits are as follows:
• Reduce the number of speed related collisions.
• Reduce collision severity.
• Minimize travel times for vehicular traffic.
• Provide roadways that protects vulnerable road users by minimizing the barrier effect
of vehicular traffic.
• Reduce vehicular emissions.
While safety is always of primary importance on all roads, the emphasis placed on the
objectives of mobility and emission has been determined when the road is classified and
it is designed into the road.
Further objectives that promote the goals of safety and sustainability are:
• To give residents a realistic expectation of actual travel speeds by providing a speed
limit that is an accurate reflection of travel speeds,
• To minimize the burden of enforcement on York Regional Police by providing speed
limits which are respected by the majority of drivers.
4.2 Technical Information
Speed limits, like any element of the transportation system, are inextricably woven into
the community fabric. Adjustments to the speed limit may have impacts and
0000'26
FEB-25-2004 09:48 YORK REGION 505 995 -dWi F-.0G
Clause No. 3 4
Report No. 2
Transportation and Works Committee
repercussions on many valued features of the community. The impacts of speed limits on
travel speed and safety are provided below,
4.2.1 Travel Speed
Drivers receive up to 90% of their information visually. The visual clues conveyed by the
road, and the roadside (including signs) are the primary determinants of travel speed.
The strongest influence on a driver's selection of travel speed is the appearance of the
road, Straight and flat alignments with wide lanes and few driveways and intersections
are a visual invitation to travel at a high speed. As a driver turns onto a roadway, the
information conveyed to the driver by the roadway design is subconsciously compared to
similar roads that have been traversed, and a travel speed is selected based on the
individual driver's past driving experience relating travel speed to safety and comfort.
Attempts have been made to counteract high travel speeds by posting speed limit signs
that restrict legal travel to much lower speeds. These attempts are consistently
unsuccessful because the visual clues provided by the roadway features (alignment, lane
widths, etc.) are more powerful to the drivers perceptions than a sign posted at the side of
the road.
In the end, it can be concluded that the most important influence on travel speed are the
design features of the road itself. The dimensions and these features, and in some
instances, the presence of the features, are determined during design using the design
speed concept, Essentially, this means that each element of the road is selected so that a
certain speed can be safely attained and maintained.
Changes in the posted speed limit affect a change in the average travel speed of traffic,
although the change in the travel speed is much smaller than the change in the posted
speed limit. For instance, a 10 km/h reduction in the posted speed limit will usually
result in a 2 to 3 km/h reduction in the average travel speed. The most successful speed
limit reductions have been established in conjunction with large public information
campaigns and/or intense enforcement efforts. In general, the posted speed limit has no
significant effect on travel speed, and drivers will travel at a speed that they feel
comfortable.
The ineffectiveness of speed limits to significantly change travel speeds has also been
documented with local data. The data contained in Table 1 illustrates the effect that a
speed limit change has on the 851h percentile speed of the traffic stream. The 85`h
percentile speed is the speed at which 85% of motorists drive at or below. When speed
limits are altered by 10 km/h and 20 km/h, the corresponding maximum absolute change
in 851h percentile speed is 2 km/h and 5 km/h, respectively. This data supports the
perception that speed limit changes absent from any other significant changes to the road
or level of enforcement, have limited impacts on actual travel speeds.
6aQ®17
FEB-25-2004 09:48 YORK REG10N yeZII
Clause No. 3 5
Report No. 2
Transportation and Works Committee
Table 1
Effects of Speed Limit Change on Travel Speeds
Posted
Percentile
Posted
- Percentile
Posted
Percentile
Speed
Speed
Speed
Speed
Speed
Speed
(km/h)
(kmth)
(km/h)
(kmlh)
(km/h)
(km/h)
Mulock Drive
70
80
60
80
-10
0
Victoria Road
60
78
50
80
-10
2
Langstaff Road
70
83
SO
78
-20
-5
Leslie Street
80
80
60
78
-20
-2
Rutherford Road
70
86
60
87
-10
1
4.2.2 Safety
The link between collisions, travel speeds and speed limits has been extensively
researched. Most of the research to date has examined the effects of modifying speed
limits on safety, but has failed to establish a definitive causal chain. For a speed limit
change to affect safety (i.e., collisions), it is necessary for the speed limit change to also
cause a change in driver behaviour (typically a change in the travel speed).
The following is what we know about travel speeds, speed limits and safety:
• Collision occurrence is reduced when the motorist travels approximately at the 85th
percentile speed.
• Collision severity is reduced by reducing travel speeds.
The link between absolute travel speed and collision occurrence is not well established.
Intuitively, one might expect that faster travel would result in a greater number of
collisions. While this may seem to be the case, a recent comprehensive review of
numerous speed -safety studies report that "the evidence is not conclusive",
4.3 Existing Methods for Setting Speed Limits
A considerable amount of effort has gone into developing a single method that can be
used universally to set an "appropriate" speed limit. The transportation profession has
developed many different methods and techniques ranging from the simple to the
complex. The most well-known techniques are described briefly below.
06002.a
FEB-25-2004 03:46 YUKK KLUIUn
Clause No. 3 6
Report No. 2
Transportation and Works Committee
4.3.1 851" Percentile Method
The research that concluded motorists traveling at the 85th percentile speed have the
lowest involvement in collisions has resulted in a majority of North American road
authorities adopting a policy of setting speed limits at the 85s' percentile speed. The
theory is that a speed limit set at the 856 percentile speed maximizes safety. This is the
easiest and by far the most popular means of setting speed limits in North America.
4.3.2 The Institute of Transportation Engineers
The Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) published Speed Zone Guidelines, which
outline a procedure for setting a speed limit other than the statutory speed limit. In brief,
the recommended practice is that speed limits be established on the basis of an
engineering study that should include an analysis of the current speed profile. The speed
limit should be set at or near the 85"' percentile speed, or the upper limit of the 16 km/h
(10 mph) pace. The 16 km/h (10 mph) pace, is the 16 km/h (10 mph) range encompassing
the greatest percentage of all the measured speeds in the speed study. The guidelines go
on to indicate that the engineering study may also include consideration of roadway
geometry, roadside development, surface condition, vulnerable road users, collision
experience, and the speed limits of adjoining road sections.
4.3.3 Northwestern Speed Zoning Technique
A slight modification on the 85"' percentile method is the Northwestern (NW) Speed
Zoning Technique. The NW technique starts by using the measured/observed 85`h
percentile speed (gathered from speed studies conducted in accordance with ITE
Guidelines) as a base speed limit, and then modifies it based on environmental,
geometric, and traffic conditions. The conditions considered are driveway density and
type, length of the proposed speed zone, lane and shoulder width, street classification,
median presence and type, pedestrian and parking activity, horizontal and vertical
alignment, and collision history.
There is little information available on its origin, and less documentation on its
effectiveness. it is more complex than using the 850' percentile speed, but there is no
evidence that it is any better than the latter method.
4.4 Current Ontario Practice
A survey was conducted of selected Ontario road authorities. The survey purpose was to
ascertain the methods being used to set speed limits in other municipalities, and to assess
their technical staffs' degree of satisfaction with their current method.
A total of twenty-six surveys were sent to municipalities in southern Ontario. Fourteen of
the surveys were completed for a response rate of 54%. Eleven of the fourteen
responding municipalities do not have a written method or process of setting speed limits
in their jurisdiction. Of the municipalities that have written policies, most use the
Northwestern Speed Zoning Technique or some modification of it. Only the Cities of
Burlington and Kingston indicated that they have evaluated their speed limit setting
QQ�9
t�Q
FEB-25-2004 09:48 YURK RtUlUN
Clause No. 3 7
Report No. 2
Transportation and Works Committee
method, The degree of satisfaction with the current Ontario methods (including case -by -
case assessment) stands at 50% (seven of the fourteen responding municipalities),
The two most mentioned reasons for setting speed limits are safety and speed control. It
is interesting to note that eleven of the fourteen respondents indicate that speed control is
one of the purposes for setting speed limits. This, despite the overwhelming scientific
evidence that indicates speed limits have a negligible effect on actual travel speeds. The
factors that are most often considered by municipalities in selecting an appropriate speed
limit are the prevailing speed of traffic, the design speed, roadway geometry, and the
setting (Le, urban, rural).
4.5 Proposed Policy Highlights
Regulations are in place for the extremes of society, not for the norms. Speed limits
should not make reasonable people acting in a reasonable manner into law -breakers.
Using this principle, it is equitable to set speed limits for those recurring conditions and
situations that encourage faster, yet safe travel. This means that maximum speed limits
should be set assuming daylight, dry roads with good pavement, clear visibility, and light
traffic volumes.
In reviewing the various methods that are used to establish speed limits and the results of
the survey of other municipalities it became evident that no one method was preferred
and for the most part, warrants or policies were not in place. In addition, from the results
of the study, not one of the well-known techniques described above had been
acknowledged as the single best method to set an "appropriate" speed limit. Therefore,
based upon the results of the review undertaken and the most recent available research
information, the recommendation was to combine the more effective components of some
of the existing techniques to establish the policy for setting speed limits on Regional
Roads.
4.5.1 Regional Roads
The following conditions are the basic elements proposed to establish speed limits on
Regional Roads.
• As abase condition, speed limits on 'York Region roads shall be between 50 km/h and
80 km/h and set at the 85th percentile speed of free -flow traffic.
• The minimum length of a speed zone to be as follows!
- In rural areas, preferably two kilometres with a minimum of one kilometre.
- In urban areas, preferably one kilometre with a minimum of 500 metres.
• Urban roadways with a driveway density of 13 driveways or more, on one side of the
roadway, be considered for a speed limit lower than the 85th percentile speed.
• When the product of the eight -hour vehicular volume and the eight -hour pedestrian
volume is greater than 1,000,000, then consideration be given to reducing the speed
FEB-25-2004 09:48 YORK REGION �Q' "'� .,.
Clause No. 3
Report No. 2
Transportation and Works Committee
limit from the 85th percentile speed. The reduced speed limit to be within 20 km/h of
the upstream speed limit to maximize the chance of compliance,
4.5.2 School Areas
The following conditions are the basic elements proposed to establish a reduced speed
limit within a school area on a Regional Road.
• Requests for a change to a speed limit in a school area shall be made by the school
Principal or the School Board.
• To be eligible, the road must be contiguous to a school and'have a minimum of 200
students.
• If the collision record indicates that the safety performance of the road is worse than
expected/predicted and alternative countermeasures have not been effective in
improving the safety performance, a reduced school zone speed limit shall be
considered.
• Qualifying schools shall be ranked/prioritized based upon potential conflicts and
safety of pedestrians using peak hour pedestrian and volume information,
• If a school zone speed limit is warranted, it shall only be in effect during the times of
the day that students are walking to and from school, as prescribed by municipal
by-law.
• A school zone speed limit maybe up to 20 km/h lower than the speed limit on the
adjacent road sections.
5. FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS
The costs associated with the manufacture and installation of signage for posted speed
limits and school zones speed limits will be incurred within the proposed 2004 Business
Plan and Budget for the Roads Transportation Branch.
6. LOCAL MUNICIPAL. IMPACT
This report provides the Region with a proposed policy that addresses the establishment
of speed limits along the Regional road network that is credible, technically sound and
consistent.
COMM
FEB-25-2004 09:4b YUKK KLUIUN yen 0�� au r...
Clause No. 3
Report No. 2
Transportation and Works Committee
7. CONCLUSION
The Region routinely undertakes investigations into the need for revised speed limits on
the Regional road network. These investigations are generally initiated by requests from
the public or elected representatives and the ongoing monitoring of the road network,
Regardless of the reason for the investigation, there is a need for a credible, technically
sound and consistent method of determining an appropriate speed limit.
This report presents the results of a review undertaken by an independent consultant, to
review the process in establishing speed limits and make recommendations for any
changes to the process and establish a warrant. Regional staff concurs with the findings
and recommendations in the consultant's report and recommends that the attached policy
(see Attachment 1) be adopted by Regional Council for establishing speed limits along
the Regional road network.
The Senior Management Group has reviewed this report.
(A copy of the attachment referred to in the foregoing is included with this report and is also on
file in the Ofce of the Regional Clerk.)
M2
00C
rLB-2b-210104 U'j: 4'd 7uKK Ktuluw
�5 Wes'
STATUS
Council Approved N N
CAO Approved: N N
TITLE: ESTABLISHING SPEED LIMITS NO.:
ON REGIONAL ROADS Effective Date:' "
Latest Revisidn,Date:
POLICY STATEMENT:
This policy provides a warrant process for the establishment speed limits along The Regional
Municipality of York road system.
APPLICATION:
The speed limit warrant criteria provides a consistent approach to determine posted speed limits
°gip along the Regional Road network.
DESCRIPTION:
Speed limits are set on Regional roads in order to:
• Provide a benchmark for enforcement.
• Respond to community security concerns.
• Provide safety equity among road users.
POLICY:
The speed limit is intended to be the maximum speed that one can safely travel along a section of
road. As speed limits should not make reasonable drivers into "law breakers", the maximum
speed limit should be set in accordance with the most favourable environmental and traffic
conditions,
APPROVAL INFORMATION
Council Minutes:
Clause No.: of Report No.:
Of the: Date:
OR
CAO Approval Date:
MOM Page 1 of 4
Establishing Speed Limits on Regional Roads Date
Base Conditions
As a base consideration, the speed limit should be set at the 85`h percentile speed of free flowing
traffic. In addition, the speed limit shall not exceed the design speed of the roadway except in
the event of isolated elements of the road that that are posted with advisory speed signing (see
section on "Other Considerations').
Multipurpose Roads
On Regional roads, the speed limit maybe less than the 85'b percentile speed if the driveway
density is greater than 13 driveways per kilometre (driveway density is to be calculated using
driveways on one side of the road).
In addition, reducing the speed limit from the 85`h percentile speed by up to 20 km/h may be
considered if the combination of the vehicular and pedestrian volumes meet the criterion of
Figure 1.
1200
Figure 1
Pedestrian Criterion for a Reduced Speed Limit
a
2
e
1000
w
rC
800
"v
d
o.
600
L
1
a00
w'
200
NO
Consider a pedestrian signal
Consider reducing
speed limit from 85th
percentile
5000 10000 15000 20000 25000
Eight -hour Vehicular Volume
Pedestrian volumes should include pedestrians crossing the road, and in the instance of roads
with no sidewalks, include pedestrians walking along the traveled edge of the road. The
pedestrian count total should be adjusted by counting elderly pedestrians and unassisted children
as two pedestrians each,
Other Considerations
The minimum length of a speed zones in urban and rural areas are preferably one kilometre, and
an absolute minimum of 500 metres, and preferably two kilometres and an absolute minimum of
one kilometre, respectively. A time -limited, reduced speed limit for a school area may be shorter
than the above minimums, but must comply with the lengths prescribed in the "School Areas"
section of this policy,
Page 2 of 5
MOM
FEB-25-2004 09:49 YORK KLUIUN -- - ---
Establishing Speed Limits on Regional Roads Date
Conditions, situations, and events that are local or temporary should generally not have the speed
limit adjusted to reflect the condition, but should be addressed through advisory warning signs
along with an advisory "safe" speed tab, as determined by an engineering study,
In the event that the pavement surface condition is such that the speed limit set by this policy is
considered inappropriate, then a lower speed limit should be posted until the road surface
condition can be reinstated to an acceptable level
School Areas
The requirements of this section supercede the `Base Conditions" above. Requests for a change
to a speed limit in a school area shall be made by the school Principal or the School Board.
Individuals and groups that would like to have a lower speed limit at or near a school must
approach the school,
To be eligible for a school zone speed limit, the road must be contiguous to a school with a
minimum of 200 registered students. A school zone speed limit may be up to 20 km/h lower
than the speed limit on the adjacent road sections. The lowest maximum speed limit that is
permitted under the Highway Traffic Act of Ontario (RSO 1990) is 40 km/h. The lower speed
limit will be applicable to the section of road that is contiguous to the school and for 150 metres
along the road on either side of the school property. The lowered speed limit may be extended if
it results in an adjacent speed limit that is too short to adequately enforce.
A school zone speed limit should be implemented if the collision record of the road section
contiguous to the school indicates that the safety performance of the road is worse than
expected/predicted. A reduced school zone speed limit should be implemented after trying all
other alternative countermeasures, including a Community Safety Zone,
Other than the above criterion, the need for a school zone speed limit will be determined by the
Roads Transportation, Traffic Operations staff by considering the individual situation. However,
qualifying schools should be ranked based on the potential conflicts and safety of pedestrians
using the following method:
Measure the peak hour pedestrian volume on the road in front of the school and calculate
the pedestrian factor as:
PF=W*X+2.9C
Where: PF = Pedestrian Factor
W = Number of pedestrians walking along the road
X = 1.08 if walking on a sidewalk or separate path
1.00 if walking on the shoulder
C = Number of pedestrians crossing the road
0000015
Page 3 of 5
FEB-25-2004 09:49 YORK REGION 905 895 3031 P.15
Establishing Speed Limits on Regional Roads Date
Each pedestrian that is less than 10 years old should be counted as 1.38 pedestrians.
Also, if a pedestrian walks along the road and then crosses the road, or crosses the road
and then walks along the road, that pedestrian should be included only in the crossing
volume
2. Measure the vehicular volume during the same hour as the peak pedestrian volume and
calculate the vehicular factor as:
VF=V*X
Where; VF = Vehicle factor
V = Number of vehicles
X = 1.00 if the existing speed limit is 50 km/h
1.73 if the existing speed limit is 60 km/h
2.20 if the existing speed limit is 80 km/
3. Calculate the total priority points by:
Total Priority Points = PF * VF
4. Rank the schools by total priority points from highest to lowest.
if a school zone speed limit is warranted, the school zone speed limit shall be in effect during the
times of the day that students are walking to and from school, as prescribed by municipal bylaw.
The school zone speed limit will be delineated using the apparatus shown in Figure 2. The
maximum speed limit at times of the day when the 40 km/h is not in effect, will be determined
using the remainder of this policy.
Figure 2
School Zone Speed Limit Sign
We
WHEN
FLASHING
NO % Page 4 of 5
•h,'-t(-�S-�Nb4 UJ;q7 YUKK KtOWN
Establishing Speed Limits on Regional Roads
JUD r.IC,
Date
CONTACT:
Director of Roads Transportation, Transportation and Works Department,
Page 5 of 5
000.0111
1,11
AGENDA ITEM # S
TOWN OF AURORA
COUNCIL REPORT No. PW04-015
SUBJECT: Agreements with GO Rail for Watermain Crossings of GO tracks
FROM: W. H. Jackson, Director of Public Works
DATE: March 30, 2004
RECOMMENDATIONS
THAT upon resolution of the timing issues identified in ReportNo. PW04-015 to the
satisfaction of the Town Solicitorand the Director of Public Works, Council authorize
the Director of Public Works:
• to sign agreements between the Town of Aurora and the Greater Toronto
Transit Authority for various watermain crossings of the GO rail tracks on
behalf of the Town; and
• to renew these agreements as appropriate, including entering into new
Crossing Agreements that may become necessary in the future.
BACKGROUND
There are four existing locations in Aurora where Town -owned watermains cross the
railroad tracks owned by the Greater Toronto Transit Authority (the corporate name for GO
Rail). These locations are:
• Yonge Street under the GO Rail bridge;
• The GO station south of Wellington Street (2 crossings); and
• Centre Street.
There are also two locations where watermain crossings will be constructed in 2004:
• For the extension of the watermain on Henderson Drive to the Yonge
Street/Industrial Parkway South intersection, as part of the reconstruction of
Henderson Drive; and
• On St. John's Sideroad.
The existing and proposed crossings are shown on Figure 1.
The crossing on Yonge Street is covered under an agreement dated February 1979, and
the crossing on Centre Street is covered by an agreement dated June 1, 1956. There are
no known agreements for the other two existing crossings, although the Town paid CN Rail
060018
March 30. 2004 - 2- Report No. PW04-015
rent of $30 per year over the years whenever the current owner sent an invoice to the
Town for any of the four crossings.
GO Rail has now embarked on a project to create a standard agreement for all
underground municipal services (sewers and watermains) that cross their tracks. The
purpose of this report is to seek Council's authorization to enter into agreements for all of
the existing and proposed crossings in the Town.
COMMENTS
The basic terms of the new standard Agreement for, pipe crossings that GO Rail is
proposing are:
Term of 10 years, renewable for a single 10 year term;
Town shall pay GO Rail $3,000 (total for 10 years) for the right to use GO Rail's
property (see Appendix 2 for rationale);
Town shall maintain insurance coverage in the amount of $51VI;
Town shall be responsible for all costs associated with the maintenance of the
watermains.
In general, staff is in agreement with the terms of the agreement. The Town already has
the required insurance coverage in place and the rationale for the cost of the agreements
has been provided by GO Rail.
There are two terms, however, that cause some concern for staff. The second and ninth
terms deal with the removal of our infrastructure at the request of GO Rail or the
termination of the agreement at the request of either party. Although staff are unaware of
any instance were existing infrastructure such..as our watermain has been required to be
relocated, we are still of the opinion that the "forthwith" clause in Article 2 and the 10 days
notice in Article 9 are insufficient.
In this regard, discussion was had with a representative of GO Rail and it appears that they
are willing to deal with this matter by, for example, extending the time allowed us to move
our plant to a more reasonable 360 days, or sooner if that can be achieved. The specific
clause rewrite has not been completed as yet but because of the pending construction on
Henderson Drive and St. John's Sideroad, staff is desirous of receiving Council approval to
enter into the subject agreements now.
In consideration of the above, therefore, it is suggested that if Council is agreeable to the
remaining clauses of the Agreement, that staff be authorized to continue negotiation of the
timing issue and proceed to sign the Agreements if an acceptable compromise is reached.
Staff also suggest that Council authorize the Director of Public Works to renew these
agreements or to enter into agreements for new crossings without having to seek Council
approval each time.
OOQ0�9
March 30, 2004 - 3 - Report No. PW04-015
OPTIONS
None. Should Council decide not to authorize the execution of these agreements GO Rail
will likely require that the crossings be removed. The existing watermain links form parts of
the water distribution network that serve the Town and should remain in place. GO Rail
would also not allow the construction of the two new watermain crossings, both of which
are important to maintaining and reinforcing the Town's distribution system
FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS
The total cost for the six agreements is $18,000 for the 10-year term. Funds in this amount
would come from the Water Rate account and accordingly will not impact on the tax levy.
CONCLUSIONS
There are currently either no agreements or very old agreements covering the existing
watermain crossings. It is in the interests of both parties to have agreements for the
existing and proposed crossings to set out the roles and responsibilities of each party. The
form of Agreement that Go Rail is proposing is standard and other than the timing issues
identified above, staff are of the opinion the agreements are reasonable.
LINK TO STRATEGIC PLAN
Goal "A" speaks to maintaining a well -managed and fiscally responsible municipality.
ATTACHMENTS
Figure 1 — Key Map showing Existing and Proposed Watermain Crossings
Appendix "A" — April 24, 2003 letter from GO Transit
Appendix "B" — Sample Agreement (Note: All agreements are identical)
PRE -SUBMISSION REVIEW
Management Team Meeting - March 24, 2004
Prepared by: David Atkins, Manager of Engineering Services, ext. 4382
r, rW, H. Jackson
Director of Public Works
000.040
ST. JOHN'S SIDEROAD 6
pLOCATION
WHERE TOWN WATERMAINS
CROSSES
GO RAIL TRACKS
t
w
fx-
c
d
o
�
CENTRE ST. 5
WELLINGTON
STREET
NOTES:
CROSSINGS 1
AND 6 ARE PRO
CROSSINGS 2
TO 5 ARE EXIS
ZINDUSTRIAL
DR.
HENDDORF
KEV HAP amOWOM E30340M A DD
FRUPOO ISMD
�nMATERNA M
CROO NSUH80
PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT
MARCH 2O04
OCCO41
®® Transit
April 24, 2003
Mr. W.H. Jackson
Director of Public Works
Town of Aurora
100 John West Way
Box 1000
Aurora, Ontario
L4G 6J1
Dear Mr. Jackson:
Appendix A
20 Bay Street • Suite 600
Toronto, Ontario, Canada M5J 2W3
Phone: (416) 869-3600 • www.gotransit.com
Phone: (416) 869-3600 ext. 5342
Fax: (416) 869-1469
Email: Loul@GOTransit.com
Subject: Underground Pipe Crossings, Newmarket Subdivision
Your letter of April 17, 2003 addressed to Dorothy Weerdenburg of UMA requesting the
rationale behind the lease costs has been passed on to me for a reply.
Let me first say that GO Transit has approached this increase on the basis of attempting to
recover costs both for the maintenance of the file and a return on the cost of acquiring the rail
corridors. I calculated all the costs that GO will and has incurred on the following basis:
a) A one time legal fee for the agreement based on $500 for 10 years.
b) A one-time realty services administration fee of $500 for 10 years for keeping track of
files, computer upgrades, searches, negotiations, accounting etc.
c) Costs for space rental, equipment, op costs etc. per year of $50.
d) Rail Operations/consultant costs for time incurred every time works take place within rail
corridor of $500 for 10 years.
e) Fee of $100 per year for rights granted in land based on 50% of average land value for an
equivalent easement of 15' x 60' minimum width of corridor not including real estate
taxes. Taxes alone range from $15 to $66 depending on location.
The above equates to approximately $300 per year or $3,000 for 10 years. As you can see I've
used absolutely the lowest possible numbers to arrive at a reasonable fee for drafting,
negotiating, and maintaining all of your files. I've not attempted to make this a revenue source
for GO but merely to cover some of the costs involved much like what the Municipality does
when charging for permits, applications etc. Also, it may have been some time since these
GREATER TORONTO TRANSIT AUTHORITY
C00042
Page 2 of 2
agreements were entered into and costs have risen dramatically. If you wish you may remit $300
per year for the next ten years for each of your agreements.
Sincerely,
L.Iacovino
Manager, Realty Services
CC. Dorothy Weerdenburg, UMA
000043
Appendix B
UNDERGROUND PIPE CROSSING AGREEMENT
NEWMARKET SUBDIVISION — MILE 28.45
THE TOWN OF AURORA, (hereinafter called the Applicant), located at 100 John West Way, Box
1000, Aurora, Ontario, L1G 6J 1 hereby applies to GREATER TORONTO TRANSIT AUTHORITY
(hereinafter called the Owner), located at 20 Bay Street, Suite 600, Toronto, Ontario M5J 2W3 for
permission to construct and maintain an underground pipe crossing (hereinafter called the Works)
across the railway line owned by the Owner at Mile 28.45 on the Newmarket Subdivision, shown on
the plan attached hereto (the Plan) at the location and in the manner shown on the Plan.
For good and valuable consideration, the Applicant covenants and agrees with the Owner that:
1. The Works shall be constructed and at all times maintained at the Applicant's sole cost and
expense in accordance with the rules, requirements, regulations, directives, orders or plans of the
Canadian Transportation Agency, Transport Canada, or any predecessor or successor governmental
agency or body whose rules, requirements, regulations, directives or plans may have effect on the
Works, and the Applicant agrees to observe and perform all the terms and conditions of the said
rules, requirements, regulations, directives, orders or plans.
2. Should it become necessary or expedient for the purposes of repair or improvement of the
railway line that the Works be temporarily removed or relocated, the Applicant shall upon request of
the Owner and at the sole cost of the Applicant forthwith remove or relocate the Works.
3. As an acknowledgement of the property rights of the Owner in the lands of the railway line
occupied by the Works, the Applicant shall pay to the Owner the sum of $3,000.00, plus G.S.T., for
the first term, in advance.
4. The term of this Agreement is for a ten (10) year period, commencing on 1 December 2003,
and may be renewed for a single further ten (10) year term, with the licence fee to be renegotiated by
the parties prior to such renewal, provided that the licence fee for the renewal term shall not be less
than the licence fee for the initial term.
5. In the event that there is any reassessment of the taxes, rates or assessments on the railway
line as a result of the Works, the Applicant shall pay to the Owner the full amount of any such
changes.
6. The Applicant shall indemnify and save harmless and, where requested by the Owner defend
the Owner from and against all claims, losses, damages, costs, expenses (including legal expenses),
actions and other proceedings, made, sustained, brought, prosecuted, threatened to be brought or
prosecuted, which the Owner may suffer or incur in any manner based upon, occasioned by or
attributable to the Works, including but not limited to any breach of this Agreement or any injury or
death of a person or damage to or loss of property arising from any act, wilful, negligent or
otherwise, or any omission or delay on the part of the Applicant, the Applicant's employees, agents
or contractors, in performing or failing to.perform the Works or as a result of the Works.
0
MOM
-2-
7. The Applicant covenants that it shall, during the term of this Agreement (including any
renewals), obtain and maintain comprehensive general public liability insurance, including coverage
for personal injury, non -owned automobile liability, death and property damage, on an occurrence
basis with respect to the Works, with coverage for any one occurrence or claim of not less than five
million dollars ($5,000,000), and the Applicant shall provide the Owner with a certificate of
insurance evidencing such coverage, which certificate shall provide that the insurer shall deliver to
the Owner at least thirty days notice in advance of the cancellation or lapse of the insurance policy or
policies described in the certificate.
8. Neither this Agreement nor any right, interest or privilege granted hereunder may be assigned
or sublicensed unless it is to a parent subsidiary or affiliate of the Applicant as defined in the Canada
Business Corporations Act without the prior written consent of the Owner.
9. This Agreement may be terminated at any time after the date hereof by either party on the
provision of ten days notice in writing to the other. On termination, the fee shall be prorated to the
date of termination, and the Owner shall repay the balance of the fee to the Applicant.
DATED this day of 2003.
THE TOWN OF AURORA
Per:
Name & Title:
Per:
Name & Title:
The Owner hereby consents to the construction and maintenance of the Works referred to
herein and upon the terms as set forth above.
DATED this day of 2003.
GREATER TORONTO TRANSIT AUTHORITY
Per:
Per:
Gary McNeil, Managing Director and Chief
Executive Officer
Jean Norman, Secretary
000045
AGfNDA fTEM # 6
TOWN OF AURORA
COUNCIL REPORT No. CSO4-09
SUBJECT: Noise By-law Exemptions for Town Events
FROM: Bob Panizza, Director of Corporate Services
DATE: March 30, 2004
RECOMMENDATIONS
THAT Council approve an exemption to the Town's Noise By-law for the 2004
Concert Series in the Town Park.
BACKGROUND
Leisure Services staff have planned the annual series of concerts that will be held on a
weekly basis in the Town Park beginning on June 30th and running through to September
25th of this year. As in previous years, door to door notices will be distributed to all
residents living in the vicinity of the Town Park to inform them about the extended hours of
music that will occur with the Concert Series.
COMMENTS
The purpose of this request is to ensure that authority has been granted under Section 9
of the Town's Noise By-law which gives Council the discretion to grant or refuse an
exemption to the terms or conditions of the by-law.
OPTIONS
Council may decide to grant the exemption or not.
FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS
None.
@00046
March 30, 2004 - 2 - Report No. CS04-09
CONCLUSIONS
The Town Park Concert Series has been a great success in past years and widely enjoyed
by the residents of Aurora. The granting of an exemption will enable the Series to continue
to be enjoyed by residents.
LINK TO STRATEGIC PLAN
Goal F
Encouraging, supporting and recognizing volunteer involvement in community activities
and special events
ATTACHMENTS
Appendix #1 Noise Exemption Request
PRE -SUBMISSION REVIEW
Management Team — March 24, 2004
Prepared by: Chris Alexander ext. 4241
Ov".
Bob Panizza
Director of Corporate Services
000047
APPENDIX #1
nCnwO'f71�tC�11T AC I CICI /i
O F F I C E
To: Mayor and Members of Council
From: Julie Gearing, Special Events Coordinator
Subject: Noise By-law Exemption
Date: March 11, 2004
The Leisure Services Department is requesting an exemption to the noise By -
Law for the following dates, locations and times:
Town Park
June 30, 2004 from 7:00pm to 12:00am
Lambert Willson Park
July 1, 2004 from 12:00pm to 4:00pm
Town Park
July 7, 2004 from 7:00pm to 9:00pm
Town Park
July 14, 2004 from 7:00pm to 9:00pm
Town Park
July 21, 2004 from 7:00pm to 9:00pm
Town Park
July 28, 2004 from 7:00pm to 9:00pm
Town Park
August 4, 2004 from 7:00pm to 9:00pm
Town Park
August 11, 2004 from 7:00pm to 9:00pm
Town Park
September 25, 2004 from 2:00pm to 8:00pm
The Department is aware that should they be held exempt, information flyers will
be distributed to local residences in the area.
Thank you for your consideration with regard to this matter.
Julie Geering
066048
AMENDMENT: Upon the question of the adoption of the resolution, it
was:
Moved by Councillor Vrancic Seconded by Councillor West
1. THAT the recommendations as set out in the Strategic Directions Final
Report dated April 2003 be forwarded to Council and the following specific
recommendations, as revised by the Five Year Official Plan Committee at
their meeting of April 14, 2003, to be carried out in the order noted, be
adopted:
Expansion of Urban Area- Regional Official Plan:
2.1 THAT the Region of York be requested to:
(a) process an Official Plan Amendment to bring the 2C lands into the Regional
Official Plan Urban Area with a request that such an amendment be enacted
subsequent to the Region completing an update of:
(i) its population projections following census releases;
(ii) residential and employment capacity projections as a result of the
advent of the Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Act and Oak
Ridges Moraine Conservation Plan; and
(iii) Census Data, 2001, updates;
AND FURTHER THAT such an amendment be enacted in consultation with the
Town of Aurora and be contingent upon the Town of Aurora completing its urban
boundaries review of the 2C lands, including demographic holding capacity, Green
Lands, and other updates supportive of the principle of development and subject to
Town -sponsored development policies, including:
(1) provision for the requirement of a secondary planning process
following the regional review and assessment;
.J2
-2
(2) subject to an identification of development land needs of the Town
including any special policy supportive for environmental or
industrial needs or other land needs;
(3) subject to inventory "take-up" from adjacent 2B lands to avoid leap-
frogging development;
(4) prioritization of infrastructure and allocation of services to
employment lands; and
(5) sound fiscal management strategies to eliminate the negative
financial impact of growth on the existing tax base.
(b) THAT as part of the Regional Official Plan Amendment, the Greenlands
System map be updated to reflect the environmental features in the 2C lands
and that in furtherance of this objective the Town of Aurora undertake
forthwith a thorough base line analysis of the environmental features and
functions within Area 2C worthy of protection prior to the finalization of the
Greenlands System update by the Region, and for that purpose retain the
services of an environmental consultant acceptable to Council.
2.2 Given the above stated objectives, that the Town of Aurora undertake in a
timely manner, the formulation of development polices set out in paragraphs
I.A. (1) to (5) above as further set out below.
2.3 THAT the population projections for the Town of Aurora be reviewed and
lowered to reflect the identified limitations on ultimate growth in Aurora once
the Region has reduced its numbers to deal with the limitations imposed by
the Oak Ridges Moraine and the East Aurora Wetland Complex.
Aurora Official Plan:
3.1 In as much as the Region's ratio of residential to employment lands (81.7%-
18.3%) is lower than Aurora's (87.9% to 12.1 %) and it's desirable for the
Town to move closer to the Region's ratio, and given that the potential
employment lands in 2C area comprise only some 200 acres and that
Council is very determined and concerned that the lands designated as
employment lands be retained as such:
(a) THAT the Official Plan be amended in concert with the revisions to
the Economic Development Strategyto include a new section devoted
to enhancing Economic Development;
(b) THAT staff be directed to prepare and submit to Council by January
10, 2004 a report outlining guidelines for conversion of employment
lands to urban and other uses in 2C lands;
01(R)US
J3
-3-
(c) THAT policies be developed and enacted to prevent the development
of 2C employment lands until such a time as the 2B employment
lands, particularly in the Leslie Street[Wellington corridor have been
serviced and made available for development; and
- (d) THAT the Economic Development Officer be asked to work co-
operatively and conjunctively with the Planning Department in
formulating such guidelines and policies.
3.2 THAT the Official Plan be amended to update the Town's commercial and
industrial policies along with the required public meetings, interest groups
consultation, reporting etc.
3.3 THAT the Official Plan be amended to update other polices as identified in
Appendix 3 to the Strategic Directions report also along with the required
public meetings and documentation.
Expansion of Town Urban Boundaries and 2C Secondary Plan:
4.1 THAT after the approval of the Regional Official Plan Amendment, the
Aurora Official Plan be amended to extend the Planning Period to 2021 and
expand the urban policy area, update relevant sections related to urban
areas and population forecasts.
4.2 THAT the Official Plan be amended by the preparation of a comprehensive
Secondary Plan for the 2C lands including background studies dealing with
environment, transportation, parks, servicing, employment land, commercial
uses, residential, phasing and urban design taking into consideration the
Strategic Directions Report based on preference to achieving employment
land.
4.3 THAT a full public process be undertaken as part of the Secondary Plan and
urban boundary expansion Official Plan Amendment.
Financial Strategv:
5. THAT a Financial Strategy including a monitoring program to ensure that
potential negative fiscal impacts of new urban expansion areas are
minimized and mitigation measures to address potential impacts be
undertaken in conjunction with the Secondary Plan process.
Phasing Strategy:
6.1 THAT a phasing strategy be incorporated into the Secondary Plan forthe 2C
area to ensure that residential development does not occur prior to
substantial build out of the 2B area and allows the employment land to
proceed as the need/opportunity arises. The Town will use all available
j' mechanisms to ensure that employment land development is concurrent or
precedes residential development in the 2C lands. „/4
10
6.2 THAT the Region be requested to prioritize infrastructure projects to service
our employment lands, and that the Region be requested to assist the Town
in its phasing strategy by not participating in front-end loading agreements to
expedite residential development.
Budget:
7. THAT Council provide a budget for the completion of these amendments and
studies as part of the 2004 Operating and Capital Budget Outlook process.
8. THAT the Committee Record of the April 14, 2003 meeting No. 04-03 be
received as information.
On a recorded vote, the amendment was CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY
0W
TOWN OF AURORA
COUNCIL No. PL04-034
SUBJECT: Proposed Natural Heritage Study 2C Planning Area
FROM: Sue Seibert, Director of Planning
DATE: March 30, 2004
RECOMMENDATIONS
THAT the Terms of reference for the Natural Heritage Study for the 2c Planning Area
be approved;
THAT a request for proposals to undertake the study be undertaken; and,
THAT the successful proposal be selected and recommended to Council by a
technical steering comprising of representatives from the Planning Department,
Regional Planning and/or Engineering and Works Department, Ducks Unlimited
and the Lake Simcoe Region Conservation Authority.
BACKGROUND
As part of the Five Year Review of the Official Plan, Council examined the timing and
extent of the future growth of the Town. The Growth Management Study of 1996 and
implementing Official Plan Amendment # 17, identified a number of Secondary Plan Areas
as well as a "future growth area" known as the 2c lands. Secondary Plans have been
prepared for all of the identified areas, and development has begun or is approved in all
areas. Council determined that the most appropriate means of planning for the 2c area
was to undertake the Natural Heritage Study prior to undertaking any other aspects of the
planning for the area. Council also directed that the Natural Heritage Study be done so as
to ascertain if any of the lands would meet the regional criteria for inclusion in the Regional
Greenland system. This would provide for a higher level of protection.
To facilitate Council's direction and ensure that the Regional Greenland system issues can
be addressed staff requested the assistance of regional staff in the preparation of Terms of
Reference for the Natural Heritage Study as outlined below. Council should be aware that
the 2c lands are covered by the provincial zoning orders preventing development that has
been enacted to allow the Province to plan for a Greenbelt. Bill 27, the Greenbelt
Protection Act" was given first reading on December 16th 2003 and the zoning orders
O
became effective at the same time.
COMMENTS
The attached Terms of Reference are largely self explanatory. Four phases are proposed,
an inventory phase, that will be followed by a public open house that will enable members
of the public to review findings and to identify any aspects of the inventory that may have
been missed. This will be followed by an analysis of natural heritage systems that
considers habitat size, shape, impacts from existing and potential adjacent land uses and
avoidance or mitigation measures required to protect the system. The third phase is the
development of policy directions that should be put in place to implement the findings of
Phase 2. This phase will need to be tested against land use proposals at the Secondary
Plan Stage and refined based on the selected approach. A Public Meeting and Council
presentation will take place at this time. The final Phase is the completion of a report and
accompanying mapping.
The Region of York and Lake Simcoe Region Conservation Authority will provide technical
input into the Study. Ducks Unlimited, a major property owner within the area, has had a
long term involvement with the wetlands that form the westerly edge of the study area.
They have records of waterfowl nesting for the area and expertise in habitat management.
They have agreed to assist with the study as well. It is suggested that these agencies
along with Town staff should form the selection committee for the consultant and the
Technical Committee with whom the consultant should liase.
OPTIONS
In view of the Provincial development freeze, Council has the option of delaying the study
until after the development freeze is lifted. On the other hand, the freeze represents an
opportunity to undertake this preparatory work with out the pressure of applications being
brought before Council for development. In view of the rapid uptake of lots within the 2b
planning area, this work can be undertaken and used as background to the Secondary
Plan and provide for the flow of development to proceed in an orderly fashion.
FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS
Funds to carry out the study have been provided in the capital budget. The funds are
derived from development charges for growth related studies.
CONCLUSIONS
Staff have worked in concert with the Region of York to produce the attached Terms of
Reference to carry out a Natural Heritage Study of the 2c future growth area. This is in
accordance with Council's direction, following from the Five Year Review of the Official
0 G(I0 5V
March 30. 2004 3 Report No PL04-03a
Plan completed in early 2003.
LINK TO STRATEGIC PLAN
The Strategic Plan has goals of well planned growth and protecting the natural
environment. The Natural Heritage Study will further both goals.
ATTACHMENTS
Figure 1- Terms of Reference Natural Heritage Study
PRE -SUBMISSION REVIEW
Management Team — March 17, 2004
Prepared by. Sue Seibert, ext. 4341
4S(69ert,-MClP, RPP
Director of Planning
�'UUD
N w
°tea
ova
I -Co
811e,WnO r E a
>tS-y�nyo�eyM Jo umol
ado°
a
Am�o
c � o
O
�a
N �Y
'6 °
cz
z
t y 'o N
E
i daajdS ayse-i
a --I
ui
L_11 l_tC p Om K 2
anuanC J7 ljLl
d mOIAAeg
m — r
m { y m n
z N •� U 'c m o.
a
C N G 4- Z
lu
0 I
i_0 r 3 LU I
E
O
O
daaadS.aBPOA
� m �
e
o > d Q
J d N 9� C
T � L
I
Z a N
daaadS dsanyde V SI—
S �®
co
o
6UeVJO diysumol C o 0
Figure 1
NATURAL HERITAGE STUDY REQUIREMENTS
FOR
AURORA 2C PLANNING AREA
March 2004
INTRODUCTION
The Town of Aurora as a precursor to a Secondary Plan for lands k -nas the 2C Planning
Area, proposes to undertake a Natural Heritage Study that will:
• Identify, map and inventory the natural heritage featur he area,
• Analyze features and functions of the area and pro dir for maintaining the
features and functions,
• Provide policy direction to implement the findi = h study t uld be
incorporated into a Secondary Plan, and
• Allow for public input into both the data t and p icy formulation of the
study.
Study Area - The study area should incl
attached) and any contiguous or adjacen e
management matters should be based on
Simcoe Region Conservation Authority.
The following should .- nclu the exist
1. Compilatio w and mary of
but not limited to the R al G - nlands s
Urban Wildlife Park Mana t'
Aurora
lands withi 2 planning area (see
tures (with 00 metres). Water
mits d be confirmed by the Lake
nditions report:
ig studies, reports and plans etc, including
Kared by Gartner Lee Limited and the
y Mickalski and associates for the Town of
ffmary o d g polr guidelines, legislation applicable to study area.
existing con s ass t of the study area (as outlined below)
ral
Identify, map a ventory I'the natural heritage features on and adjacent to the Aurora 2C
Planning Area, in i g I forms such as valley and stream corridors, and areas of steep
topography.
Vegetation Communities
I. All on -site vegetation communities should be mapped to the Vegetation Type level
based on the Ecological Land Classification (ELC) for Southern Ontario (Lee et al, 1998).
Adjacent off site vegetation communities and those on non -participating lands should be
mapped to the Community Series level.
Fauna
I. Both breeding birds and amphibians must be inventoried using recognized methods
II. Other fauna should be inventoried based on incidental observations and other signs
such as browse, scat, tracks, dens, nests etc.
Draft March 2004
Flora
A botanical inventory for all natural areas
Landforms
An inventory of all significant landforms
Aquatic Natural System
Identify, inventory and map all existing aquatic ecosystems on and
site. Id
Information should be presented on :
I. Existing and potential Fish communities
il. Habitat characteristics (including areas of grou
III. Channel Morphology (detailed fluvial geomo is
crossings, servicing or other infrastructure are pr sed)
IV. Extent of connection to upstream and an
V. Areas of groundwater recharge and dischar
VI. Exiting surface drainage areas
VII. Existing hydrogeological condit' n of the site bas
water well records, supplemented as n - ry with field
necessary peizometer work)
A large portion of the 2C lands are adjace to .F
includes a large area that is devoted to an ban
Ducks Unlimited. It is imp that the con
components of the Nats in determe
requirements and c ctivity tural Featur s
be required with Du limite determine t
levels in the ponds and rel tters.
may
of the
to the subject
red where
g soils information,
(including any
incially Sig cant Wetland which also
d Lands that are owned by
expan the role of each of these
the tre ment of adjacent lands, buffer
In additional significant consultations will
activities and plans relating to the water
A PubliXtha
se willle
eld to`view the findings of the Existing Conditions Report
and to ,nput ofspecifics that members of the community may have
respeccollec
The purpose of this analysis is to identify and/or design a natural heritage system that
maintains and enhances the features and functions on, and surrounding, the subject site,
protects or enhances the amount and distribution of natural cover, taking into consideration
proposed changes in land use. This analysis should consider habitat patch size, shape and
existing and potential adjacent land uses, and avoidance and mitigation measures required
to protect the system. The following should be considered:
Connectivity
Draft March 2004
00"rW 5
I. The current level of connectivity between habitat patches on and off site must be
identified, protected and enhanced. This includes connectivity both at the site level and the
broader landscape level.
Sensitivities
I. All vegetation communities as well as flora and fauna species must be evaluated.
These evaluations must be based on Provincial, regional, and local legislation, policy and
perspectives
Direction or criteria should also be provided on:
I. The establishment of natural feature limits including
features, geotechnical reporting (when required), meander
H. Improvements required to the size and shape of ha`I
impacts of potential changes in the land use.
III. Improvements required to improve the amo nd
landscape.
IV. Buffers between natural areas and new ses.
V. Crossings of Natural features (locations an L
VI. Baseline condition water balance
VII. Protection and enhancement o. roundwater rec
Vill. Stormwater and Groundwater Lion measures i
recommendations.
IX. Edge management requirements the a be
and potential development areas.
X. Identification of re on areas.
XI. Management re = Ire ..: _ for existin atures, in
for all open space fe es.
%a.nkfloodplains,, limits of
n required).
the negative
cover in the
criteria)
discharge areas
3 any infrastructure
heritage features
a open space master plan
XII. Requireme onito W and manag t (including restoration)
Defining the heritag a ra f ely related to the surface and ground water
studies to t a y cha s in the h ologic cycle will not degrade, but restore, the
natural tem.
For le; seasonal r bala"r wetlands (may require a minimum 1 year of
measur ter level dat aseflo ontributions to streams, recharge/discharge areas,
vulnerable a ' ers etc.
All of the above ation ould be provided on a map(s) that can be used to identify non -
developable and p i, li developable areas.
Based on the foregoing, policies should be developed to protect and enhance the features
and functions of the wetland and other natural heritage features. These policies should be
suitable for inclusion in a Secondary Plan document edited so as to be compatible with the
format of the document and the land uses that may derive from that work. The policies
should meet the requirements of the Provincial policy Statement Section 2.3, the Regional
and local Official Plans and take into account the requirements of the Lake Simcoe Region
Conservation Authority.
Draft March 2004
Specific requirements related to monitoring of the functioning of the Natural Heritage System
before, during and post development should form part of the policy recommendations.
Public Open House and Meetinp
A Public Open House and Meeting will be held to present the findings of the study receive in
input and provide information on how the recommendations need to be implemented.
PHASE 4 COMPLETION OF THE STUDY
Following the Public Meeting, any changes agreed should bMe report finalized.
MANAGEMENT OF THE STUDY
Coordination with York Region and LRRCA
York Region and the LSRCA are prepared to pYovi ut i e Hydrogeologtcal
components of this program through: 10
* review of the scope of work for p sed technical s s
* provision of relevant data (local an in support Obsed studies
* review and input of proposed method or a essment, particularly of
water balance
* review and com nt on s = findings
* provision of data cted M ork Region o RCA in a format suitable for inclusion in
their data managem -
The con n s = • - expo— = to make allowance in their program for up to three
meeti and sufficie ing - o velop a scope of work and review findings and
places . t e appropriat a ional xt. Allowance should be provided in the schedule for
York Re r= nd LSRCA t -sem and provide any required information. Ducks
Unlimited a ajor lando er in the area and have data respecting waterfowl breeding
and habitat e . e. They , ve agreed to participate in the Study and assist as required.
In addition to the above co-ordination there will also be a technical committee formed to work
with the Consultants throughout the Natural Heritage Study. It is anticipated that the
committee will be comprised of representatives from the Region, LSRCA, Town and Ducks
Unlimited. Consultation with the landowner's group needs to take place as some landowners
have begun to undertake natural features review.
The consultant should be expected to make allowance for up to 4 meeting with the Technical
Committee.
Draft March 2004 0, 0 0 FJ
DELIVERABLES
Background report (15 hard copies and I electronic copy to Town of Aurora standards)
including:
a Documentation of the resources materials and references used as background to the
study,
b All technical data compiled or collected in support of the study, and
c All relevant mapping materials depicting a and b above.
Draft Final report (15 hard copies and 1 electronic copy to Tow urora standards)
including:
a Draft management recommendations consistent with t - quirements of this terms
of reference,
b Draft map products depicting natural heritage cons mts an •:portunities.
III Final report (6 hard copies and 1 electronic
a Final management recommendations c(
of reference, f
b Final map products depicting natural he
TIMING
A detailed time frame for the Natural H
the consultant and steering committee.
Draft March 2004
be
of Aurora s ards) including:
he requireme thGs terms
as the first priority of
AGENDA ITEM #!
TOWN OF AURORA
GENERAL COMMITTEE No. PL04-035
SUBJECT: Proposed Regional Official Plan Amendment #43
Regional Centres and Corridors
FROM: Sue Seibert Director of Planning
DATE: March 23, 2004
RECOMMENDATIONS
THAT Report PL04-035 be received for information; and
THAT notice of the Region's Public Meeting scheduled for April7rh, concerning
Regional OPA # 43 be included on the Town's Notice Board requesting that
comments be provided to both the Region and the Town on the proposed
ROPA # 43; and
THAT a further report be prepared detailing suggested recommendations prior
to the Regional adoption of proposed ROPA # 43.
BACKGROUND
The Regional Official Plan as adopted in October of 1994 sets out a regional structure that
envisages a system of centers and corridors that provide a focus for residential and
commercial developments. It aims to make efficient and compact use of urban areas by
focusing mixed use development in areas that can be serviced by transit. The plan sets
out regional centers, to be identified by Markham, Vaughan, Richmond Hill and Newmarket
in their Official Plans, and corridors being Yonge Street with the exception of Yonge Street
South. The plan specifically notes that the "character of these corridors will change over
their length, including compact mixed -use centres, historical and new mainstreet areas,
employment and business areas as well as rural natural areas". In the 1994 Official Plan
Aurora is not a Regional Centre and that has been acceptable from Aurora's perspective
and compatible with the Town's policies.
It is appropriate that the Regional Official Plan provides direction on the structure of the
Region and since regional transportation and transit are cost intensive, and the use of
essential services should be maximized for many reasons including environmental,
therefore the initiative to further match landuse with transit is appropriate. However, the first
draft of the amendment caused staff some concern as it relates to the Yonge Street
Corridor and the density proposals. Draft ROPA # 43 proposes an overall density target
within both the centers and corridors of 2.5 Floor Space Index —the ratio of building divided
by the lot area — with the highest densities being in the Regional Centres. Other proposals
6,0006
March 23, 2004 - 2 - Report No. PL04-035
are to require that municipalities designate key development areas (KDA) that would be
secondary planned and prezoned or otherwise dealt with to streamline approvals. These
KDA's are to be within 500 metres of existing and planned conventional transit stops and
rapid transit stops with the highest densities within 200 metres of transit stops. Attachment
# 2 shows these transit stops and the above noted distance parameters.
Draft ROPA # 43 targets an increase in the amount of the Region's forecasted population
increase to be accommodated within existing built up areas from a minimum of 20 to
30%. It also provides that there are areas within the corridors that are "unlikely to change
much at all, like historical areas and environmentally sensitive features like the Oak Ridges
Moraine". This is a positive policy from Aurora's perspective and should provide for some
certainty in the Yonge Street South area where a lengthy OMB hearing was held relating to
the levels of density that are appropriate in that sensitive area.
COMMENTS
At the time of preparation of this report the Region had not yet released the latest draft of
its proposed Official Plan Amendment # 43, although is expected shortly. Therefore a full
review of the current document that will soon be superseded has not been undertaken.
While much more than density targets are included in draft OPA # 43, what staff have
prepared for Council is an analysis of existing higher density -developments along the
Yonge and Wellington Street corridors that may assist Councillors in enhancing their
appreciation of how floor space indices translate into existing Aurora buildings.
As noted above, Floor Space Index is the area of the building divided by the site area.
Both are gross measurements, To illustrate the Aurora examples the attached plan and
chart (attachment 1) provides the location, lot area, site area and Floor Space Index for
selected properties. It is noted that areas are taken from assessment and Building
Department records so the Floor Space Indices provided may not be totally accurate but
provide a very good indication of the manner in which Aurora higher density buildings relate
to the targeted 2.5 FSI. It is also noted that of the buildings selected, both 146-147
Wellington and 15207 Yonge Street have the highest FSI at 1.3 or approximately 50% of
the Regional target. These buildings as Council is aware are very different in scale due
largely to the different size of the lot area. Both have at grade parking. If underground
parking were to be provided, greater building coverage would be possible. The building at
15207 Yonge Street is an 18 unit mixed use building while 146-147 Wellington Street is a
200 unit building. While each of these buildings currently fits well into its surroundings, the
fact they have the same FSI is coincidental since they are so different although it does
illustrate how property size can influence the FSI.
What would probably be most helpful is for Council to see real examples of 2.5 FSI
buildings in situations similar to those described above. Staff have not, however, been able
to locate such examples.
The Aurora Official Plan takes the approach of requiring "that new residential development
(in residentially designated areas) shall be at he human scale of the existing urban fabric
and not exceed 7 storeys". In Community Commercial designations, the height limit is 5
000063
March 23, 2004 -3- Report No. PL04-035
storeys with specific limitations in the Historic Core area that restrict the height furtherto 2-
3 at the street fagade. This in turn is translated into a zoning provision for the C2- Central
Commercial zone that allows a maximum of 3 storeys with a notwithstanding clause that
permits a maximum of 5 storeys provided the 0 and 5th floors are setback 3 metres from
the main front wall and exterior side wall of the 3rd storey.
To date these standards have worked for Aurora reflecting its status as a local centre in the
Regional Official Plan. The concern that staff have that is shared by some other local
planning departments, is that if the Regional Plan has a target of 2.5 FSI, will the other
principles as discussed above from the local plans be overridden, in that the local Official
Plan is subordinate to the Regional Plan. While staff would like to review in detail the draft
of the ROPA # 43 when it is released, it may be appropriate for the Region to recognize
very clearly in the final ROPA, that Aurora does not fit the same criteria as the Regional
centres, and while modest, compatible infill is appropriate and desirable for a local Centre
within a Regional Corridor, an alternative standard to that proposed for the Regional
Centres and Corridors should be developed, befitting a community that will have function
that differs from Regional Centres.
A1�t� SIM
Council could register its concern with the draft ROPA # 43 now or await a further draft and
public input and staff review that may be received.
FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS
As part of the background work for ROPA # 43 the Region is undertaking an analysis of the
Regional financial implications of the proposed policy. The understanding staff have of that
process is that local costs will not be accounted for. Since local municipalities have
significant soft service costs such as recreation and libraries, this analysis will have
limitations and may not be an adequate indicator of the financial impacts of the centres and
corridors study. That document should be reviewed when complete to determine if any
comments need to be made.
Proposed ROPA #43 requires the local municipalities prepare Secondary Plans for KDA's.
There are costs associated with preparing such documents which include, an examination
of infrastructure constraints and opportunities, traffic impacts, availability of community
facilities such as parks and recreation etc.
CONCLUSIONS
The Regional Centres and Corridors Strategy and draft ROPA # 43 aim to concentrate a
significant proportion of the Region's long-term growth in the Regional Centres of Vaughan,
Markham, Richmond Hill and Newmarket and along Regional Corridors. Both the corridors
and centres are subject to the same policy proposals although it is acknowledged that
centres and corridors vary throughout their areas. The ROPA proposes that local
municipalities define key development areas that will be the subject of infill. However, the
B .l =
document targets density objectives based on a Floor Space Index of 2.5. While the
Aurora Official Plan supports a range of densities, affordable housing and intensified use of
serviced residential areas, it provides that this should take place without detracting from the
physical character of the community. In addition the plan has an objective of maintaining
the human scale of existing residential development, protecting privacy and amenity of
individual dwellings and avoiding both monotony and excessive contrasts in scale or
height. In Aurora, no experience with densities at 2.5 FSl exists but based on an analysis
of existing buildings, some sense of how that index relates to the status quo can be
determined, leading staff to have concerns about that targeted FSI.
A public process has been scheduled for all Regional Centres and also for Aurora since it
is within a Regional Corridor. It is noted that meeting has been rescheduled to April 7, to
accommodate members of Council who may wish to attend.
It is suggested that Council give notice of that meeting on the Town's Notice page and that
following the release of the revised draft of ROPA # 43, a further report be undertaken,
including reference to any public comments received.
LINK TO STRATEGIC PLAN
The Strategic Plan has goals of continuing controlled well -planned growth
ATTACHMENTS
Attachment 1 — Map and chart detailing Floor Space Index as it relates to existing buildings
in Aurora.
Attachment 2 — Transit Stops
PRE -SUBMISSION REVIEW
Management Team — March 17, 2004
Prepared by. Sue Seibert, ext. 4341
e Seibert, MCIP, RPP
Director of Planning
0 0 0 6 5-