Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Agenda - Council - 20040713
let TOWN OF AURORA COUNCIL AGENDA NO.04Y4 nEsur, mr 13, 2004 Immoo PA, COUNCIL CHAMBERS A6ROBI1TOWN WL PUBLIC RELEASE 9/7/04 LMJ TOWN OF AURORA COUNCIL MEETING AGENDA NO. 04-24 Tuesday, July 13, 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. 111 ADOPTION OF MINUTES Special Council Minutes of June 22, 2004 Meeting Number 04-21, Council Minutes of June 22, 2004 Number 04-22 and Special Council Minutes — Public Planning of June 23, 2004 Number 04-23 RECOMMENDED: THAT the Council Minutes Meeting Numbers 04-21, 04-22 and 04-23 be adopted as printed and circulated. IV PRESENTATIONS Presentation from Ms Vivian Hould from St. John Ambulance the (pg. P-1) `I Play it Safe With Dogs' Program. V DETERMINATION OF ITEMS REQUIRING SEPARATE DISCUSSION Council Meeting No. 04-24 Page 2 of 16 Tuesday, July 13, 2004 VI ADOPTION OF ITEMS NOT REQUIRING SEPARATE DISCUSSION VII DELEGATIONS (a) Grey Noble and Associates Inc. - Project Managers (pg. D-1) Re: New Seniors' Centre in Aurora - Building Design Update (b) Mrs. Jenny Cooper of Stop Transmission Lines (pg. D-6) Over People (STOP) Re: (Item 8) Proposed Hydro One Replacement of Transmission Lines (c) Ms. Bonnie Kraft, Resident (pg. D-7) Re: (Item 8) Proposed Hydro One Replacement of Transmission Lines (d) Ms. Sue Fusco of Stop Transmission Lines (pg. D-8) Over People (STOP) Re: (Item 8) Proposed Hydro One Replacement of Transmission Lines (e) Ms Josie Toporoski, resident (pg. D-15) Re: (Item 8) Proposed Hydro One Replacement of Transmission Lines M CONSIDERATION OF ITEMS REQUIRING SEPARATE DISCUSSION IX REGIONAL REPORT X OTHER BUSINESS, COUNCILLORS X1 READING OF BY LAWS NIX90011,954MIT; THAT the following listed by-laws be given 1 st, 2nd and 3rd readings, and enacted: 4557-04.T BEING A BY-LAW to (pg. 363) appoint Municipal Law Enforcement Officers for Council Meeting No. 04-24 Tuesday, July 13, 2004 Page 3 of 16 the Corporation of the Town of Aurora. (T. Weeks/K. Akey) 4558-043 BEING A BY-LAW to amend Parking By-law 3377-92 as amended, with respect to Disabled Parking in the Town of Aurora 4559-04.L BEING A BY-LAW to authorize the acquisition of land described as Part of Lot 87, Plan 246 (Terra Aurora Inc.) 4560-041 BEING A BY-LAW to authorize the conveyance of land described as Part of Lot 87, Plan 246 (Terra Aurora Inc.). 4561-04.D BEING A BY-LAW to amend By-law No. 2213-78 (Preserve Homes) 4562-04.T BEING A BY-LAW to designate and erect stop signs at the intersection of Gurnett Street and Kennedy Street East 4563-04.T BEING A BY-LAW to amend Parking By-law 3377-92 as amended, with respect to Gurnett Street 4564-04.D BEING A BY-LAW to amend By-law No. 2213-78 (Town of Aurora Recreation Centre) 4565-04.D BEING A BY-LAW to amend By-law No. 2213-78 (MI Developments Inc.) (pg. 365) (pg. 367) (pg. 369) (pg. 371) (pg. 374) (pg. 375) (pg. 377) (pg. 381) Council Meeting No. 04-24 Tuesday, July 13, 2004 Page 4 of 16 4566-04.T BEING A BY-LAW to amend Parking By-law 3377-92 as amended, with respect to Tyler St. 4567-04.H BEING A BY-LAW to appoint an Overall Responsible Operator and Operators -in -Charge for the Town of Aurora. 4568-04.D BEING A BY-LAW to exempt Part of Blocks 95, 98 and 99 on Registered Plan 65M-3657, in Aurora, from the Part Lot Control provisions as provided in subsection 50 (5) of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c.P.13 (as amended). 4569-04.0 BEING A BY-LAW to Confirm Actions by Council Resulting From This Meeting - of July 13, 2004. Xll IN CAMERA Property and Personnel Matters (pg. 383) (pg. 385) (pg. 386) (pg. 387) THAT Council proceed In Camera to address property and personnel matters. Xlll ADJOURNMENT Council Meeting No. 04-24 Tuesday, July 13, 2004 Page 5 of 16 ile 2. 91 4. AGENDA ITEMS ADM04-017 — Legal Services - Request for Proposal RECOMMENDED: (pg. 1) THAT a request for proposal for external legal services be issued; and THAT the results of the proposal be reported to Council to permit the selection of external counsel to represent the Town. TR04-014 — Second Quarter Financial Review @ June 30, 2004 (pg. 13) RECOMMENDED: THAT the Treasurer's report TR04-014 "Second Quarter Financial Review @ June 30, 2004" be received for information. BA04-005 — Variance to Sign By-law (pg. 30) Aurora United Church —15186 Yonge Street RECOMMENDED: THAT Council approve the site -specific request for a variance to By-law 3400-92 as it affects 15186 Yonge Street to permit the proposed sign area to increase from the maximum 4.0 m2 to 5.94 mz. BA04-006 — Variance to Sign By-law #3400-92 — Rogers Video (pg. 40) RECOMMENDED: THAT Council grant a variance to the Town of Aurora Sign By-law 3400- 92 as amended, to permit the erection of one additional wall sign with a maximum area of 8.72 square metres on the north wall at 14879 Yonge Street for Rogers Video. Council Meeting No. 04-24 Page 6 of 16 Tuesday, July 13, 2004 5. ACCESS O4-02 - Committee Record of the Accessibility Advisory (pg. 47) Meeting 04-02 held on June 24, 2004 RECOMMENDED: THAT the Committee Record of the Accessibility Advisory Meeting 04-02 held on June 24, 2004 be received for information; and a) Universal Barrier Assessment of Town Facilities THAT staff be requested to obtain further information as suggested by the Committee regarding the Universal Barrier Assessment of Town Facilities and report back to the July 29th Committee meeting. b) Ontarians with Disabilities Act - Update THAT staff inform the Region of York of their support of the proposed workshop to learn about new Ontarians with Disabilities Act, 2001 (ODA); and THAT the Region of York be requested to advise the Committee as early as possible of the proposed date of the workshop. 6. Letter from Raquel Kerr, Assistant to the Chairman of the Board (pg. 53) Re: Request for exemption from the Noise By-law for the Magna Hoedown 2004 RECOMMENDED: THAT the correspondence be received and endorsed. 7. BA04-007 — Request for Model Home Agreement (pg. 54) Preserve Homes Corporation RECOMMENDED: THAT Council authorize the Mayor and Clerk to execute a model home agreement between the Town of Aurora and Preserve Homes Corporation to allow for the construction of 7 model homes prior to registration of their subdivision. Council Meeting No. 04-24 Tuesday, July 13, 2004 Page 7 of 16 8. PL04-086 — Hydro One Electric Power Supply to York Region (pg. 63) RECOMMENDED: 1. THAT Council request that the following actions be undertaken by Hydro One prior to its determination of a preferred alternative for the upgrade of the supply of electricity to serve northern York Region: 1) Hydro One undertake, as part of the Class Environmental Assessment Process, a fully documented identification and assessment of all possible routes and options for expanded power transmission capacity to northern York Region, including the use of other transmission corridors supplying northern York Region, the use of existing and proposed Ministry of Transportation corridors such as Highway's 404, 400 and future 427, pursuing new corridors on rural lands, undergrounding of systems, and other alternatives; 2) Hydro One, in evaluating all alternatives, give greater consideration to environmental, social and economic impacts on existing and future urban areas and established and future residential communities, including schools adjacent to and in close proximity to the proposed transmission lines, and a lesser consideration to the factor of cost; 3) Hydro One, in considering any alternatives within existing urban areas undertake further detailed analysis relating to: a) The criteria set out in Section 41 of the Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Plan for the approval of an infrastructure project, such as a new or upgraded transmission line: b) A full inventory and assessment of natural features and wildlife corridors and functions that would be potentially affected by construction activities and transmission corridor operations and relationship to adjacent urban development; c) An assessment of the impact of the proposal on the intended use of the Hydro One transmission corridor for future trail system activity linkages within urban areas; d) An assessment of the visual impact of the power transmission towers in an established urban environment, including an assessment of the potential economic impact on homeowners and the loss of enjoyment of residential yards that are in proximity to the hydro corridors; e) Review, with Transport Canada, the compliance of tower transmission heights with respect to Transport Canada Airport zoning regulations; Council Meeting No. 04-24 Tuesday, July 13, 2004 Page 8 of 16 f) Provide information on the effects of electromagnetic fields (EMFs) on human health; disclose the relative EMF strength emanating from the proposed 230 kV line; undertake a health risk assessment of the proposal in relation to adjacent urban land uses, in particular residential uses, schools and parks; and identify mitigating measures that would ensure that any proposed changes in transmission capacity will not increase the public's exposure to EMFs; g) A determination as to whether there are alternative strategies available to provide the required supply including routing of supply circuit(s) on existing infrastructure emplaced by local utilities on the Regional Road network. 2. THAT Council request notice of and the opportunity to be represented at any meetings to be arranged by the Regional Chair with the appropriate Ministers to discuss the issues arising out of the Hydro One proposal; 3. THAT any correspondence received from the Regional Medical Officer of Health commenting on the health issues relating to EMFs be placed on the Town's website for public information; 4. THAT Town and Hydro staff continue to participate in discussions with the impacted municipalities and the Region to discuss a common response to the Hydro One proposal; and 5. THAT the Clerk forward a copy of this resolution to the Premier of Ontario, the Minister of the Environment, the Minister of Energy, the Minister of Health and Long -Term Care, the Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing, York Region MPPs, the York Region District School Board, the York Region Catholic District School Board, the Independent Electricity Market Operator and to the Region of York and other affected local municipalities. 9. PW04-027 — Award of Tender No. PW-2004-05 - Reduce Extraneous (pg. 159) Flows in the Wastewater Collection System RECOMMENDED: THAT Tender No. PW2004-05 for the works to "Reduce Extraneous Flows in the Wastewater Collection System" be awarded to Liqui-Force Services (Ontario) Inc. at its tendered price of $494,525 (excluding GST); THAT Council authorize the Mayor and Municipal Clerk to execute the attached Form of Agreement between the Town of Aurora and Liqui-Force Services (Ontario) Inc.; and THAT Report PW04-027 be referred to the Regional Municipality of York with a request that the Region consider increased sewage capacity Council Meeting No. 04-24 Tuesday, July 13, 2004 Page 9 of 16 allocation for the Town of Aurora because of the reduction of extraneous flows into the Regional sewer system as a result of the implementation of Tender No. PW2004-05. 10. PW04-030 — Safe Drinking Water Act (pg. 182) RECOMMENDED: THAT Report No. PW04-030 entitled "Safe Drinking Water Act" be received for information; THAT Council designate: the position of Manager of Operations Services as the Overall Responsible Operator; and • the positions of Public Works Supervisor (Water/Wastewater), Public Works Supervisor (Roads/Traffic), and Manager of Operations Services as Operators -in -Charge. THAT the Overall Responsible Operator and the Director of Public Works be authorized to designate an Overall Responsible Operator to act in the absence of the Manger of Operations Services; THAT Council recognize the Public Works Supervisor (Water/Wastewater) as the primary Operator -in -Charge and that the Overall Responsible Operator and the Director of Public Works be authorized to designate Pubic Works Crew Leaders as Operators -in -Charge as required in the absence of the Public Works Supervisors; THAT staff be directed to report further on the matter of the operation of the Town's water and sewage systems as necessary or as additional Provincial regulations are enacted; and THAT Bylaw No. 4567-04.H be enacted. 11. PW04-031 —Winter Road Maintenance Service Delivery Options (pg. 192) RECOMMENDED: THAT Council direct staff to prepare and issue tenders to commence this 2004/2005 winter season for the: 1. Supply and delivery of 3, 4, 5, 7 or 8 contracted de-icing/plow trucks; and 2. Plowing and optional sanding/salting of the Town's 3 commercial parking lots. Council Meeting No. 04-24 Tuesday, July 13, 2004 Page 10 of 16 THAT staff be requested to provide a further update report for Council's consideration regarding the winter road maintenance service delivery options and labour implications after the tenders have been reviewed. 12. PW04-032 — Agreement with Hydro One Networks Inc. for (pg. 197) Streetlights along Bayview Avenue between Wellington Street and St. John's Sideroad RECOMMENDED: THAT Council authorize the Director of Public Works: • to sign the attached Agreement for Licensed Occupancy of Power Utility Poles between the Town of Aurora and Hydro One Networks Inc. for the installation of streetlights on Hydro One poles along Bayview Avenue; and • to enter into new Occupancy Agreements with Hydro One Networks Inc. that may become necessary in the future. 13. PW04-033 — Results of Tender for reconstruction of St. John's (pg. 236) Sideroad between Yonge Street and Bayview Avenue RECOMMENDED: THAT Report No. PW04-033 regarding various matters related to the reconstruction of St. John's Sideroad be received as information; and THAT staff: • engage an outside consultant to undertake a peer review of the need and, if necessary, alternative locations and construction methodology for the Town's watermain on St. John's Sideroad from Old Yonge Street to Industrial Parkway North; and • report back as soon as practicable on the results of this peer review; and THAT with respect to the St. John's Sideroad reconstruction tender, the Regional Municipality of York: • be requested to implement the approved design for the Town's sidewalk (including boardwalk and irrigation), bikeway and illumination; and Council Meeting No. 04-24 Tuesday, July 13, 2004 Page 11 of 16 • be informed of Council's decision in the matter of the Town's watermain; and THAT additional funds as described in Report No. PW04-033 be approved from the Development Charges Reserve for the construction of the sidewalk (including boardwalk and associated irrigation), bikeway and illumination on St. John's Sideroad; and THAT staff be requested to report to Council on the necessary process to amend the 2004 budget and update the Development Charges By-law to reflect the tender prices as described in Report No. PW04-033. 14. PW04-034 — Award of Tender No. PW 2004-40, Removal and (pg. 246) Replacement of Concrete Sidewalk, Curb and Gutter at various locations in the Town of Aurora RECOMMENDED: THAT Tender No. PW 2004-40, Removal and Replacement of Concrete Sidewalk, Curb and Gutter at various locations in the Town of Aurora be awarded to Lima's Gardens and Construction Inc. at the tendered price of $49,717.70 (excluding GST); THAT Council authorize staff to expend funds under this tender to the budgeted amount of $60,000 (excluding GST); and THAT Council authorize the Mayor and Municipal Clerk to execute the attached Form of Agreement between the Town of Aurora and Lima's Gardens and Construction Inc. 15. ADM04-016 — Request for Land Exchange (pg. 250) Terra Aurora Inc. (Avant Imaging and Information Management Inc.) 205 Industrial Parkway North, Aurora RECOMMENDED: THAT By-law 4405-03.D being a by-law to prescribe the form, manner and time for the provision of notice be hereby waived to allow public notice of the proposed exchange of public lands to be given 12 days prior to the action being taken as opposed to 14 days; THAT the Mayor and Clerk be authorized to execute the Offer to Purchase Agreements and the Option to Purchase Agreements between the Town and Terra Aurora Inc.; Council Meeting No. 04-24 Tuesday, July 13, 2004 Page 12 of 16 THAT By-law 4559-041, being a by-law to acquire certain lands described as Part of Lot 87, Plan 246, Part 3, 65R-27176 be enacted; and THAT By-law 4560-041, being a by-law to convey certain lands described as Part of Lot 87, Plan 246, Parts 1 and 2, 65R-27176 be enacted. 16. PL04-081 — Zoning By-law Amendment Application (pg. 283) Preserve Homes Corporation Part of Lot 21, Concession 2 E.Y.S. File D14-16-03 RECOMMENDED: THAT report PL04-081 be received and that implementing Zoning By-law Amendment No. 4561-04.D be enacted. 17. PL04-082 — Site Plan Application (pg. 291) 630758 Ontario Limited Part of Lot 80, Concession 1, E.Y.S. 297 Wellington Street East and 120 Mary Street File D11-01-04 RECOMMENDED: THAT Report PL04-082 be received as information; and THAT, subject to the resolution all outstanding issues and the submission of all fees and securities, Council authorize the Director of Planning to enter into a site plan agreement between 630758 Ontario Limited and the Town of Aurora, respecting the construction of an eight bay coin operated car wash and an automatic car wash to be constructed as a future phase. 18. PL04-083 — Zoning By-law Amendment Application (pg. 302) (Removal of the Holding Prefix) MI Developments Inc. Part of Lot 20, Concession II File D14-07-04 RECOMMENDED: THAT Council enact By-law 4565-04.D to remove the Holding (H) prefix to allow the subject lands to be developed for a medical facility. Council Meeting No. 04-24 Tuesday, July 13, 2004 Page 13 of 16 19. PL04-085 —'Aurora Gateway Business Park' (pg. 308) Whitwell Developments/State Farm Subdivision, Wellington Street East, Highway 404 and Leslie Street Part of Lots 21 and 22, Concession 3 EYS File D12-00-4A RECOMMENDED: THAT Council hold a special Council Meeting on July 29, 2004 at 5:00 p.m. for the purposes of authorizing the Mayor and Clerk to execute a Subdivision Agreement between the Town of Aurora and Whitwell Developments/State Farm (`Aurora Gateway Business Park'), with respect to the business park lands as defined within the Whitwell Developments/State Farm Subdivision Agreement, contained within red - lined Draft Plan of Subdivision D12-00-4A. 20. PL04-087 — Application for Exemption from Part Lot Control (pg. 131) Arista Homes (Bayview Greens) Inc. Blocks 95, 98 and 99, Registered Plan 65M-3657 Limeridge Street File D12-PLC-08-04 RECOMMENDED: THAT Council approve the request for exemption from Part Lot Control made by Arista Homes (Bayview Greens) Inc. to divide Blocks 95, 98 and 99 on Limeridge Steet, Registered Plan 65M-3657 into separate lots. THAT Council enact By-law 4568-04.D 21. PL04-089 — Zoning By-law Amendment Application (pg. 319) Town of Aurora (Burnett Lands) Part of Lot 21, Concession II 1344 and 1400 Wellington Street East File D14-25-03 Related Files: D09-08-03 and D11-05-04 RECOMMENDED: THAT Implementing Zoning By-law 4564-04.D be enacted. Council Meeting No. 04-24 Tuesday, July 13, 2004 Page 14 of 16 22. LS04-031 - Public/Private Partnership - Soccer Bubble (pg. 326) RECOMMENDED: THAT the appended Tri-Party Letter of Understanding between the Town of Aurora, 1446407 Ontario Limited and the Aurora Youth Soccer Club outlining responsibilities for the provision of a soccer bubble be endorsed; and further THAT Council direct staff to proceed with the preparation of an Agreement based on the Letter of Understanding and report back to Council for approval of this Agreement prior to the commencement of any Capital works. 23. LS04-033 - Additional 2004 Community Grant Request (pg. 332) RECOMMENDED: THAT Council approve an additional 2004 Grant request for Samantha Sendel in the amount of $500.00. 24. LS04-034 - Fundraising for New Seniors Centre (pg. 341) RECOMMENDED: THAT Council endorse the establishment of a Fundraising Committee for the New Seniors Centre as described in Report No. LS04-034. 25. Correspondence from Gary Stanhope, (pg. 348) Senior Project Manager — MHPM Re: New Recreation Complex — General Contractor Prequalification and Updated Project Estimate RECOMMENDED: THAT Council approve the following list of prequalified General Contractors for invitation to bid on the construction of the New Aurora Recreation Complex: 1. Atlas Corporation 2. Aquicon Construction 3. Ball Construction 4. Bondfield Construction 5. Eastern Construction 6. Maystar Construction 7. Vanbots Construction Council Meeting No. 04-24 Tuesday, July 13, 2004 Page 15 of 16 THAT Council receive the updated project Class B estimate and authorize the Architect and Engineers to complete working drawings and specification in order to issue for tender in August 2004. 26. EDAC04-02 - Committee Record of the Economic Development (pg. 357) Advisory Committee Meeting 04-02 held on June 16, 2004 RECOMMENDED: (a) THAT the Committee Record of the Economic Development Advisory Committee Meeting 04-02 held on June 16, 2004 be received as information; and (b) Town's New Promotional Folder Package THAT the Economic Development Advisory Committee receive and endorse the Town's Promotional Folder Package, and recommend that staff be authorized to go forward with the printing and distribution of the package in a timely manner; and (c) On -Line Business Directory THAT the Economic Development Advisory Committee receive the Economic Development Officer's memorandum and endorse the Economic Development Division entering into a Servicing Agreement with the Breken Group to structure and maintain an On -Line Business Directory, through the Town's existing website; and THAT staff be authorized to move forward with this project at a cost of $900 and applicable taxes annually; and (d) Memorandum from the Economic Development Officer Employment Land Retention Strategy THAT The Economic Development Advisory Committee receive and endorse the Employment Land Retention Strategy; and THAT the Economic Development Officer meet with the Marketing/ Communications Coordinator to discuss initiatives and existing strategies in place, to promote public awareness regarding the benefit of employment lands in Aurora and their positive impact on the Town's tax base: and Council Meeting No. 04-24 Page 16 of 16 Tuesday, July 13, 2004 (e) Town's Promotional Video THAT the Economic Development Advisory Committee receive and endorse the Town's Promotional Video, and that staff move forward with the production process. 27. LS04-035 - Extension to Janitorial Contract and (pg. 362-a) Tender No. LS2001-20 RECOMMENDED: THAT Council authorize the extension of the attached Addendum Agreement between Royal Building Cleaning Limited and the Town of Aurora for an additional one (1) year to July 31, 2005. COUNCIL — JULY 13, 2004 COUNCIL REPORT SUBJECT: Legal Services - Request for Proposal FROM: Larry Allison, Chief Administrative Officer DATE: July 13, 2004 RECOMMENDATIONS AMEN®A ITEM # I No. ADM04-017- THAT a request for proposal for external legal services be issued; and THAT the results of the proposal be reported to Council to permit the selection of external counsel to represent the Town. BACKGROUND In 2000 the Town conducted a request for proposal for legal services. Four firms were selected to represent the interests of the Town: WeirFoulds — general governance and planning matters Gowling LaFleur & Henderson — planning and environmental matters Paterson MacDougall — general litigation Hicks Morley Hamilton Stewart Storie— labour relations and employment law The historic activity for the use of external legal resources is summarized in the table below: 2000 1 2001 1 2002 2003 Total 1 $513,811.76 1 $204,886.78 1 $125,601.74 1 $267,418.48 The use of external resources is tied primarily to activity relating to land development issues and appearances before the Ontario Municipal Board. Activity rates change as much as 150% between years as reflected in the above table which can present a —1— COUNCIL - JULY 13, 2004 July 13, 2004 - 2 - Report No. ADM04-017 challenge in budgeting year-to-year. The Town has been well served by its current providers as reflected by an informal survey of current senior staff. However, to retain public confidence in the manner in which funds are expended, and to achieve competitive and secure fixed rates for future services, a request for proposal is advised. There is always an inherent increase in costs in selecting new counsel due to the time its takes for that firm and its members to familiarize themselves with the corporate culture of the Town, the personnel and the documents such as the Official Plan and Zoning By-law. Future legal activity will only increase as the Town's population grows and the complexity of the issues that Council addresses increases. The staffing plan approved during the 2004 budget process contains a Town Solicitor, a Law Clerk, and part-time Legal Assistant, supplemented by a Property Management position added in late 2004 or early 2005 and a Junior Lawyer in 2006. The Town will require external expertise in the following areas and law firms will be permitted to submit the names and credentials of individuals in one or all of the areas: • Planning and development • Environmental • Litigation • General municipal governance At this time, the firm of Hicks Morley represents for the Town for labour and employment issues. The firm has performed its role well and remains the preferred supplier until the current negotiations are completed. The Proposal The proposal will request that fees be fixed for a period of three years from the date of acceptance of the proposal. No guaranteed minimum use of resources will be provided but firms will be provided with an analysis of the Town's historic usage of legal resources. The Town will also specify in the request for proposal certain minimum billing information and practices, but the actual form of account will be firm dependent. The proposal sets out a monitoring of the relationship through the use of: • opening work plans for each file within 30 days of receipt of the file which will set out a budget and time line for the work; • formal meetings between the Town Solicitor and the principal contact every 6 months to monitor the relationship; • same day reporting of major events; • a protocol for media relations; and —2— COUNCIL — JULY 13, 2004 July 13, 2004 -3 - Report No. ADM04-017 • items that will not form part of the account but will be incorporated in the hourly rates. With more law firms offering additional services to attract and retain clients, the RFP contains requests that responding firms indicate if they will provide at no additional cost to the Town: • a service where phone calls of less than 10 minutes on new matters are provided for free — this service would permit the early intervention and timely provision of legal advice; I • access to the Town's file electronically to permit Town staff to review the work completed to date without incurring additional costs; • a fixed fee for defending the Town's small claims court matters which average 1-2 per year; • electronic newsletters and invitations to senior opportunities provided by the firm; • an educational seminar once a year for Town staff on and risk management matters; and • access to the firm's law library for the Town Solicitor. Town staff to educational changes in development law In order to obtain the services of firms with expertise in planning and development, the Town will review the submissions for the ability of the firm to address conflicts. Firms with expertise in planning and development rarely, if ever, work solely for the municipal sector, thus the need for confidentiality screens or other mechanisms to address real or perceived conflicts will be requested in the proposals. Personal interviews will be conducted by Town staff of the key contact individual appointed by each firm to manage the relationship with the Town. OPTIONS The Town can conduct a request for proposal that will require an internal review team to analyze the submissions, interview a selection of the respondents and report to Council 2. The Town can continue using the current providers. If this option is selected, their rates should be negotiated and confirmed'for a fixed future period of 3 years. 3. The Town may re-examine in its entirety the manner in which legal resources are provided to the Town, which would involve external assistance from an expert in the provision of legal services and this analysis is not recommended at this time due to the comparatively small costs for internal resources and the minimal use of external legal resources. —3— COUNCIL — JULY 13, 2004 July 13, 2004 - 4 - Report No. ADM04-017 FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS Every retainer for the use of external counsel is initially approved by the Director of the department and subsequently by the CAO to ensure that internal legal resources are utilized to their maximum before external assistance is retained. The detailed accounts submitted from external firms are initially audited by Legal Services for accuracy, sent to the originating department for approval, finalized and negotiated as required by the Town Solicitor, and sent to the CAO for final approval. This extensive review ensures that the services paid for are minimized. The costs of preparing and analysing the request for the proposal will be internal. External advertising will be required and a half page advertisement in a lawyers' publication, the Ontario Reports, at a cost of $800.00 is advised. CONCLUSIONS A request for proposal for external legal services is recommended and the results will be reported to Council in the fall of 2004. LINK TO STRATEGIC PLAN The future savings to be realized through securing a fixed fee for legal service will support the Strategic Plan, Goal A. ATTACHMENTS A — Draft RFP PRE -SUBMISSION REVIEW Management Team — July 7, 2004 Lawreihce Allison Chief Administrative Officer —4— COUNCIL - JULY 13, 2004 ,�r e.�own of l,, o�L Y THE CORPORATION OF THE TOWN OF AURORA KtQUL5l FUK NKUF L)5AL $ AUZUU4-45 DATE ISSUED: 14 July 2004 CLOSING DATE: 30 August 2004 12:00:00 NOON, local time. Proposals are invited for the provision of external legal services Town of Aurora. , GENERAL INFORMATION Submissions 6 signed copies, one marked "original"), properly marked as to contents (return envelope must show proposal number, proponent's name, closing date) will be received no later than the time and date indicated, at the following address: Town of Aurora Corporate Services, 2nd floor 100 John West Way Aurora, Ontario L4G 6,11 Attn: B. Panizza, Town Clerk To receive consideration, this form must be fully completed, properly signed with original signature and returned with all attachments. FAXED PROPOSALS WILL NOT BE ACCEPTED. IF DOCUMENTS ARE SUBMITTED VIA COURIER, THE OUTSIDE ENVELOPE MUST INDICATE THAT THE CONTENTS ARE PROPOSAL DOCUMENTS. The Corporation of the Town of Aurora reserves the right to accept any proposal in whole or in part, whether the price or prices be the lowest or not, and may reject any or all proposals, and such acceptance or rejection will be made pursuant to policies of the Corporation. THIS FORM MUST BE SIGNED AND SUBMITTED WITH YOUR PROPOSAL OR YOUR PROPOSAL WILL BE REJECTED. Please direct all technical inquiries to: Phyllis Carlyle (905) 726-4745 and all general purchasing inquiries to Katherine Bishop, (905) 727-3123, Ext 4121. 1/we have carefully examined the documents and have a clear and comprehensive knowledge. of the requirements and have submitted all relevant data. Ilwe agree, if selected, to provide those goods andlor services to the Town in accordance with the terms, conditions, and specifications contained inlhe proposal document and our submission. Firm Name: (Proponent's full legal name) Signature of Signing Officer: (I have the authority to bind the Corporation) Print Name: Title: Address: Postal Code: Date: Phone # () Fax # ( ) ACKNOWLEDGE RECEIPT OF ADDENDA BY NUMBER AND ISSUE DATE (if applicable): ADDENDA NO. DATED ADDENDA NO. DATED -5- COUNCIL - JULY 13, 2004 Background Service and Skills Requirements The Town of Aurora is conducting a request for proposal for external legal services to supplement its internal legal resources. Proponents may submit proposals to provide legal services for all or any of the following areas: 1. General municipal governance 2. Planning and development 3. General litigation 4. Environmental law General municipal governance — advice and legal opinions on the powers and procedures of Council, Municipal Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act, the Municipal Elections Act, purchasing issues, negotiation of contracts relating to software acquisition; lease agreements; agreements of purchase and sale; drafting by-laws such as purchasing and procedure by-laws Planning and development — negotiation and drafting of planning agreements and attendances before the Ontario Municipal Board; interpretation of the Planning Act, the Town's planning documents; development charges advice and guidance General Litigation — defending uninsured claims, prosecuting by-laws; representing the Town before various Board and Tribunals; Environmental Law — advising on the issues surrounding contaminated sites; advice on guidance on the requirements of the construction of new infrastructure In your submission please clearly indicate the specific areas that the firm wishes to be considered for. The Town's historic use of external legal services has averaged $278,000 a year for the last 4 years with a range from $125,000 to $513,000. The majority of the work has been in the area of planning and development law involving attendances before the Ontario Municipal Board. Proponents' Qualifications Proponents' Fees The Proposal shall identify the name of the individual who shall be the principal contact for the Firm. The Town Solicitor and this individual shall meet every 6 months to discuss the relationship and any issues that either party may be experiencing. All lawyers' and planners' curriculum vitas should be submitted along with their hourly rates. Please also provide information on the depth and breath of your firm's experience in the municipal field. The hourly rates submitted shall be fixed for a period of 3 years from the date of acceptance of the proposal by Council. The hourly rates provided shall not be the sole determinative factor but one factor in the Town's selection of its external counsel. Q-C COUNIeI.TownQhLI re1hat2ori2 lawyer be assigned to each file and that the lawyer should have the appropriate background and expertise to handle the matter. The Town will not honour accounts containing the following items: • Office related expenses - charges for Faxes, couriers, telephone, postage, opening/closing files, meals or mileage • Review of the file by a new lawyer assigned to a previously existing file • Multiple reviews or re -drafting of correspondence or other materials by a number of lawyers • Attendances by more than one lawyer at a matter or the use of students • Time related to the orientation of the law firm's staff to the Town or the Town staff In your submission please identify whether you will charge for travel time to the Town offices and if so, at what rate. As well, if you are prepared to defend small claims court matters on behalf of the Town (an average of 2 a year) for a fixed fee please include the proposed rate in your submission. Some firms in the GTA,are providing their clients with the ability to have short (10 minute) conversations for quick questions at no cost, please include in your proposal whether this is a service your firm will provide. Once a year the Town would like its provider of external legal services to educate its senior and planning staff on changes in development law and risk management matters, please indicate whether your firm would be prepared to present a free seminar in the Town's offices for Town staff. If your Town has an electronic newsletter or hosts educational opportunities for its clients would you please detail these client development initiatives. Accounts shall be rendered in a detailed manner indicating the work performed, the lawyer and the time expended. A review of the accounts by the lawyer managing the relationship would be advantageous prior to their submission for payment to the Town. Accounts should only be submitted to the Town Solicitor when more than $2000 is owing or the matter has been completed. Retention of experts will require the Town's pre -approval. Schedule of Events The Following schedule of events will apply to the selection process. The selection process may include interviews with short listed candidates: Event: Date: Release of RFP 14 July 2004 Deadline for submission of proposal 30 August 2004 Evaluation of Proposals completed 10 September 2004 Selection of Preferred Proponent 28 September 2004 This schedule is subject to change and appropriate notice in writing of any changes will be provided where feasible. Proposal Evaluation An evaluation team consisting of relevant town staff will conduct the evaluation of proposals. The evaluation criteria are as follows: Knowledge/experience 50% Availability of technology for Internet based document exchange 10% —7— COU"Alckg JULY 13, 20040% Solicitor/Client Interface At the commencement of each file the lawyer will be required to establish a work plan and budget to be agreed upon with the Town Solicitor within 30 days of the initial retainer. Variances from the plan or budget will require the approval in advance of the Town Solicitor. A closing memo indicating the work completed, the total fees and the results of the matter should be provided. The Town must be advised and kept apprised of all important dates especially before the courts or administrative tribunals so Town staff are permitted the opportunity to attend if desired. The Town requires all documents to be provided in an electronic form. Ideally the Town should have a parallel file to that of the law firm or if your firm has the ability to provide an extranet to permit the Town to review the Town's file on line please specify this. The Town assumes that in responding to the proposal that your firm has the appropriate internet security in place for the transmission of the Town's confidential information, if this is not the.case please detail when this might be in place. Reporting will be required the same day as to the outcome of major events — e.g. by telephone or e-mail. All media inquiries should be directed to the Town's Chief Administrative Officer. Research requiring more than 2 hours will require prior approval of the Town Solicitor. Copies of the research will be provided to the Town for its purposes. Please indicate if the Town's legal staff may access your firm's library. The Town will own all legal work generated under the relationship and as the municipal sector freely shares legal opinions the Town will on occasion circulate the work provided by the proponent. From time to time the Town will provide original documents to the law firm, at the conclusion of any file these documents should be returned at no cost to the Town. The Town will approve of any destruction of the Town's file. Please set out in your proposal your typical file retention schedule. Correspondence to the Town should be addressed to the Town Solicitor with copies to the client department as required. The Town reserves the right to hire other firms as required TERMS AND CONDITIONS Proponent's Responsibilities It is the Proponent's responsibility to become familiar with and comply with Town Purchasing policies. Confidentiality Confidentiality of records and information relating to this work must be maintained at all times. All correspondence, documentation and information provided by Town staff to any Proponent in connection with, or arising out of this RFP or the acceptance of any proposal: - Remains the property of the Town; - Must be treated as confidential; - Must not be used for any purpose other than for replying to this RFP and for fulfillment of any related subsequent contract. COON&j116orresOALMIdAMation and information provided to staff of the Town by any proponent in connection with, or arising out of this RFP, and the submission of any Proposal will become the property of the Town, and as such, subject to the Municipal Freedom of Information Act (MFIPPA), and may be released pursuant to the Act. The Proponent's name at a minimum shall be made public on request. Because of MFIPPA, Proponents are advised to identify in their Proposal material any scientific, technical, commercial, proprietary or similar confidential information, the disclosure of which could cause them injury. Any information in the Proponents' submissions that is not specifically identified as confidential will be treated as public information. All correspondence, documentation and information provided to the Evaluation Team may be reproduced for the purposes of evaluating the Proponent's submission to this RFP. PLEASE NOTE that materials supplied in response to a Proposal become a record of the Town and are subject to the Municipal Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act. The Town takes the position that such materials are not supplied in confidence and form part of the records made generally available upon request to the public. If you have any questions with regard to this policy, please contact the Municipal Clerk (Telephone: 905-727-1375). Conflict of Interest Statement In its Proposal, the Proponent must disclose to the Town any potential conflict of interest that might compromise the performance of the work. If such a conflict of interest does exist, the Town may, at its discretion, refuse to consider the Proposal. If, during the Proposal evaluation process or during the term of the retainer, the Proponent is retained by another client giving rise to a potential conflict of interest, then the Proponent will so inform the Town. If the Town requests, then the Proponent will refuse the new assignment or will take such steps as are necessary to remove the conflict of interest concerned, Proponents are cautioned that the acceptance of their Proposal may preclude them from participating as a Proponent in subsequent projects where a conflict of interest may arise. The Proponent for this project may participate in subsequent/other Town projects provided the Proponent has satisfied pre -qualification requirements of the Town, if any, and in the opinion of the Town, no conflict of interest would adversely affect the performance and successful completion of the retainer by the Proponent. Non -Collusion A Proponent shall not discuss or communicate, directly or indirectly, with any other Proponent or their agent or representative about the preparation of the Proposals. Each Proponent shall attest that its participation in the RFP process is conducted without any collusion or fraud. If the Town discovers there has been a breach of this requirement at any time, the Town reserves the right to disqualify the Proposal or terminate any ensuing retainer. Submission Deadline The requested number of copies of the Proposal in a sealed envelope must be submitted. One copy of the proposal is to be marked "Original" and contain the signed PROPOSAL SUBMISSION FORM. Deliver the completed packaged prior to 12:00 noon on the closing date to the address stated on the cover page. Proposals will not be considered unless: • Received by the date and time specified; and • Received at the address specified on page 1; and men 14 COUNCIL - JULY 13, Confaiin the signed PROPOSAL COVER SHEET (page 1). Faxed Proposals will not be accepted. Proposals will be opened immediately after 12:00:00 noon, and will be referred to an evaluation team for evaluation. Disqualification of Proposals Proposals, which are incomplete or received after the proposal submission deadline, as recorded by the Town on the date, time and place, as outlined above will not be considered. Proponents are solely responsible for ensuring that Proposals are delivered as required. Delays caused by any delivery service, including Canada Post, will not be grounds for an extension of the Proposal Submission deadline. Faxed or electronic transmissions or other forms of unsealed proposals will not be considered. The Town's Right to Reject The Town, at its discretion may: select anyone proposal; select part of one or a combination of more than one proposal; or reject any or all or part of any or all proposals. The Town is not obligated to select the proposal with the lowest price. The Town reserves the right to negotiate with any or all proponents. Subject to the other provisions of the RFP, the criteria specified are the sole criteria, which will be used for the evaluation of proposals. No Adjustments to Proposals No unilateral adjustments by Proponents to submitted proposals will be permitted. Proponents may withdraw their proposal prior to the closing date and time by notifying the Town in writing. Proponents who have withdrawn a proposal may submit a new proposal, which must be received by the Town under the same terms as outlined. After the closing date and time the proposal is binding on the Proponent. If the Town requires clarification of a Proponent's Proposal, that Proponent will provide a written response to a request for clarification, which shall then form part of the Proponent's Proposal. Communication The Proponent is requested to identify one senior individual by name, address and telephone number who will act as the proponent's primary contact with the Town with regard to this project. It is the responsibility of the Proponent to understand all aspects of the RFP and to obtain clarification if necessary before submitting their proposal. Addendum An addendum, should one be necessary, will be issued to all proponents that were issued the Request for Proposal. Only answers to issues of substance will be sent out to all bidders. The Town reserves the right to revise this RFP up to the Proposal Submission Date. Any revisions shall be included in Addenda to the RFP distributed to all Proponents. When an Addendum is issued the date for submitting Proposals may be changed by the Town.if, in its opinion, more time is necessary to enable Proponents to revise their Proposals. The Addendum shall state any changes to the Proposal Submission Date. To receive consideration, all addenda must be acknowledged on your proposal submission cover sheet. It is the proponents' responsibility to verify issue of addenda. Period of Validity of Proposals and Agreement Proposals submitted shall be irrevocable and binding on Proponents from the date of the Proposal submission to the date the successful Proposal is selected by the evaluation team and/or the Chief Administrative Officer or his designate, and the successful Proponent executes a retainer agreement with the Town. The successful Proponent will be required to enter into a retainer agreement satisfactory to the Town. —10— COUNCIL - JULY 13, 2004 No Assignment The successful Proponent shall not assign any part of the project which may be awarded to it under the Agreement without the prior written consent of the Town, which consent shall not be unreasonably withheld. However, such written consent shall not under any circumstances relieve the successful Proponent of its liabilities and obligations under this RFP and the Agreement. Failure or Default of Proponent If the Proponent, for any reason, fails or defaults in respect of any matter or thing which is an obligation of the Proponent under the terms of the RFP, the Town may disqualify the Proponent from the RFP and/or from competing for future RFP's issued by the Town. In addition, the Town may consider that the Proponent has withdrawn any offer made, or abandoned the Agreement if the offer has been accepted, whereupon the acceptance, if any, of the Town shall be null and void. Resource Commitments The Proponent must make available appropriately skilled workers, consultants or subcontractors, as appropriate, and must be able to provide the necessary materials, tools, machinery and supplies to carry out the project. These resources must be available on a dedicated basis, as required, to carry out the project with due care, skill and efficiency. Insurance The Proponent shall provide evidence of insurance satisfactory to the Town. All lawyers providing services to the Town shall be members in good standing. Indemnity The successful Proponent will be required to indemnify the Town for any loss, costs, claims or damages arising from the proponent's work. Errors & Omissions The Town shall not be held liable for any errors or omissions in any part of this RFP. While the Town has used considerable efforts to ensure an accurate representation of information of this RFP, the information contained in the RFP is supplied solely as a guideline for Proponents. The information is not guaranteed or warranted to be accurate by the Town, nor is it necessarily comprehensive or exhaustive. Nothing in the RFP is intended to relieve the Proponents from forming their own opinions and conclusions with respect to the matters addressed in the RFP. Negotiations The Town may award a contract on the basis of initial offers received, without discussion. Therefore, each initial offer should contain the Proponent's best terms/information, including all required documentation as listed. The Town reserves the right to enter into negotiations with the selected Proponent. If the Town and the selected Proponent cannot negotiate a successful contract, the Town may terminate the negotiations and begin negotiations with the next selected Proponent. This process will continue until a contract has been executed or all Proponents have been rejected. No Proponent shall have any rights against the Town arising from negotiations. Default by Proponent If the Proponent commits any act of bankruptcy; or if a receiver is appointed on account of its insolvency or in respect of any of its property; or if the Proponent makes a general assignment for the benefit of its creditors; then, in any such case, the Town may, without notice terminate the retainer. —11— COUNi46 propMI1rT. fJIA1to Wpiy with any request, instruction or order of the Town; or fails to pay its accounts; or fails to comply with or persistently disregard statutes, regulations, by-laws or directives of relevant authorities relating to the work; or fails to prosecute the work with skill and diligence; or assigns or sublets the contract or any portion thereof without the Town's written consent; or refuses to correct defective work; or is otherwise in default in carrying out its part of any of the terms, conditions and obligations of contract, then, in any such case, the Town may, upon expiration of ten days from the date of written notice to the company, terminate the contract. Any termination of the retainer agreement by the Town, as aforesaid, shall be without prejudice to any other rights or remedies the Town may have. If the Town terminates the retainer agreement, it is entitled to: a) take possession of all of the work in progress, and finish the work by whatever means the Town may deem appropriate under the circumstances; b) recover from the proponent loss, damage and expense Incurred by the Town by reason of the proponent's default (which may be deducted from any monies due or becoming due to the proponent, with any balance remaining to be paid by proponent to the Town). 10 —12— COUNCIL — JULY 13, 2004 i AGENDA 1'A ► �� TOWN OF AURORA COUNCIL REPORT SUBJECT: Second Quarter Financial Review @ June 30, 2004 FROM: Jim Carey, Director of Finance/Treasurer DATE: July 13, 2004 RECOMMENDATIONS No. TR04-014 THAT the Treasurer's report TR04-014 "Second Quarter Financial Review @ June 30, 2004" be received for information. BACKGROUND The Town of Aurora's "2004" Operating Budget was approved by Council on April 27, 2004 with a 5.5% increase in net levy requirements over 2003. The Town's "2004" Capital Budget which was comprised of capital projects totalling $31,453,978 was approved by Council on the same date. Due to the budget being approved in the second quarter, the first quarter "2004" financial review was not completed. Upon completion of the second quarter financial review the forecast surplus is estimated at $76,000. COMMENTS In a continued effort to improve the relevance of the information being reported, staff has identified methods of better reflecting the timing of recognizing expenditures and revenues. The product of which results in recognition of expenses and revenues as theytypically occur during the year as opposed to the standard 26% per quarterwhich does not always coincide with the timing of many seasonal activities (e.g. Maintenance responsibilities for roads - winter/ summer, parks, sidewalks, etc.). Hence a more reasonable representation of actual results that leads to better consistency across a diverse set of municipal services. As well, certain program areas within the review have been adjusted to reflect timing issues associated with their billing schedules relative to the timing of delivering the services (e.g. Wholesale water and sanitary sewer purchases from the Region of York, and solid waste and recycling programs for which billings may straddle the quarter end dates). Appendix "D" has been added to show further details for specific expenditures within the overall corporate budget. These costs are reported on Appendix "A" within the departmental functions. —13— COUNCIL — JULY 13, 2004 July 13, 2004 - 2 - - Report No. TR04-014 As attachments to this report, Appendix A (Corporate Summary) & Appendix B (Departmental Summary) summarize the second quarter results (Budget versus Actual analysis) while the following commentary provides specific insight to factors that have contributed to the noted variances. It should be emphasized that the following commentary concentrates on exceptions as opposed to those program areas that fall within budget forecasts at the conclusion of the second quarterly reporting period (June 30, 2004). Accessibility Committee and Info Aurora budgets have not been spent Consulting, legal fees and equipment replacement costs have not been incurred as per budget Insurance costs have not been distributed Vehicle costs lower than budgeted License Revenues are received in advance Vehicle/Equipment & Yard Vehicle supplies costs not incurred to date Roads Seasonal works just underway (See Quarter 3 & 4) Winter Services Costs are higher due to weather conditions (Jan -Apr 2004) 2004 Capital Works program coincides with 50% of budget approval Timing differential for discharge fees/wholesale water purchase (See quarters 3 & 4 for Region of York billings) Contribution to Reserves (See Quarter 3) —14— COUNCIL — JULY 13, 2004 July 13, 2004 -3- Report No. TR04-014 Timing differential for collection and disposal costs forwaste collection and recycling services Administration Salaries are lower than budgeted Parks Revenues only received for 3Q% of budgeted Community Centre Revenues are lower than costs incurred Leisure Complex Revenues have been received but costs not incurred yet Special Events Canada Day costs incurred, revenues not booked yet Community Programs Revenues received for summer programs — costs incurred throughout program cycle (See quarters 3 & 4 for equalization) Aurora Seniors Centre Prepayment for outings the revenues have not been collected yet Leslie Street Property Revenue received for full year Leased Facilities Revenue has not been received yet (See quarters 3 & 4 for equalization) NOW Insurance costs have not been distributed Contribution to Reserve has not been recorded yet Provincial Grants yet to be recorded/received Rental Revenues received for 110% of budget Cost recovery revenues received for consulting fees incurred in 2003 Part time position not filled to date Payments in Lieu are lower than budgeted —15— COUNCIL - JULY 13, 2004 July 13, 2004 - 4 - Report No. TR04-014 :CAWGL _ � ENaIT, ._ Contingencies have not been incurred yet Contribution to Reserve not fully booked for 2004 Capital Budget Report As a supplement to the quarterly financial review, Appendix "C" - "2004" Capital Actuals/Budget Summary is now included to provide an update on the status of approved capital projects for the current period. OPTIONS NIA FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS Budget to actual variances maintained a favourable outlook at the conclusion of the second quarterly operating period. Revenue targets are slightly off budget, however projections do not point to significant shortfalls when extended to year-end. Program areas that will require additional review include Public Work's as a result of a prolonged winter season. CONCLUSIONS Staff will continue to monitor budget to actual variances on a monthly basis throughout "2004". As capital -intensive projects proceed into full swing the importance of the information contained within subsequent quarterly financial review reports will become more useful as a performance/measurement tool. LINK TO STRATEGIC PLAN Goal "A" - A well managed and fiscally responsible municipality ATTACHMENTS Appendix "A" - Quarterly Financial Review - Corporate Summary Progress Report Appendix "B" - Quarterly Financial Review - Departmental Progress Report -16- COUNCIL - JULY 13, 2004 July 13, 2004 - 5 - Appendix "C" - "2004" Capital Actuals / Budget Summary Appendix "D" - Detailed Review of Specific Expenditures PRE -SUBMISSION REVIEW Management Team Meeting - Wednesday, July 7, 2004 Prepared by: Darlene Munro ext. 4117 A&e24' ,2Z Jim Carey, MBA, C A Director of Finance/Treasurer Report No. TR04-014 -17- COUNCIL - JULY 13, 2004 TOWN OF AURORA Quarterly Financial Review Appendix "A" Summary Progress Report - June 30, 2004 Section Approved 2004 Budget (000's) P ° to Bu t Actuals to June 30 (000's) on, - 05- 0 1 MAYOR AND COUNCIL $ 478 $ 239 $ 194 $ 45 2 ADMINISTRATION 2,902 1,454 1,280 174 3 TOWN HALL OPERATIONS 352 176 142 34 4 FIRE/EMERGENCY SERVICES 4,652 2,326 2,395 (69) 5 BUILDING ADMINISTRATION (892) (446) (454) 8 6 ANIMAL CONTROL 57 29 37 (8) 7 BY-LAW SERVICES (17) (9) (20) 11 8 PUBLIC WORKS 8A Public Works Administration 142 57 57 - 8B - Vehicles/Equipment & Yard 30 17 (1) 18 8C Roads 1,042 401 377 24 8D Winter Services 926 630 772 (142) 8E Engineering Services - - 9 TRANSIT SERVICES - - - - 10 WORKS CAPITAL 1,302 651 651 - 11 SANITARY SEWERIWATER - 24 42 (18) 12 GARBAGE & RECYCLING 1,225 613 582 31 13 LEISURE SERVICES 13A Administration Services 844 423 384 39 13B Parks 1,863 774 886 (112) 13C Community Center Operations (122) (61) 92 (153) 13D Community Buildings 86 47 34 13 13E Leisure Complex 401 201 80 121 13F Special Events 61 33 41 (8) 13G Community Programs 166 84 (74) 158 13H Aurora Seniors Centre 12 6 19 (13) 131 Leslie Street Property (16) (8) (17) 9 13J. 215 Industrial Parkway (101) (51) (3) (48) 13K Fire Hall Operations 14 LIBRARY (APL) 1,846 923 748 175 Library Operations (Facility) 467 234 196 38 15 LIBRARY SQUARE 22 11 5 6 16 PLANNING ADMINISTRATION 492 246 219 27 17 COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT 43 22 7 15 18 CORPORATE REVENUES Investment Revenues (575) (288) (312) 24 Penalty on Taxes (625) (313) (306) (7) Property Tax (16,938) (8,130) (8,130) Payments In Lieu of Taxes (275) (138) (97) (41) Supplementary Taxes - , - Promissory Note Interest (920) (460) (462) 2 Other Revenue -Dividends (40) (20) - (20) CORPORATE EXPENDITURES Operational Contingencies 200 100 31 69 Contribution to Mun Cap Res 785 393 460 (67) Tax Write-offs 125 63 69 (6) Net Expenditure (Revenue) I $ - $ 5:3,trum 761 •U're 79UN -..( ems. -�: P�ojed�ed Surplus (,(Det;ai %,� �� Filename: 2004- JUNE 30 FINANCIAL REVIEW.xIS Sheet Name: Appendix "A" -18- Page 1 COUNCIL - JULY 13, 2004 TOWN OF AURORA Quaterly Financial Review Appendix "B" Departmental Progress Report - June 30, 2004 Approved pp `rtl Actuals to ° Section 2004 Budget B e t June 30 r" s (000,$) ! Et 9 .- ( ) e tci 000's 1 MAYOR AND COUNCIL 478 239 194 45 2 ADMINISTRATION General Administration 272 136 117 19 Economic Development 122 61 49 12 Clerks Department 401 201 205 (4) Telecommunications 115 58 66 (8) Treasury 505 253 250 3 MIS Department 483 242 192 50 Legal Services 497 249 202 47 Personnel 339 170 155 15 Marketing/Communications 168 84 44 40 2,902 1,454 1,280 174 3 TOWN HALL OPERATIONS 352 176 142 34 4 FIRE/EMERGENCY SERVICES 4,652 2,326 2,395 (69) 5 BUILDING ADMINISTRATION (892) (446) (454) 8 6 ANIMAL CONTROL 57 29 37 (8) 7 BY-LAW SERVICES (17) (9) (20) 11 8 PUBLIC WORKS 8A Public Works Administration 142 57 57 - 8B Vehicles/Equipment&Yard Vehicle & Equipment Mtce. (10) (3) (25) 22 Works Building - Scanlon Court 40 20 24 4 30 17 1 18 8C Roads Sidewalks 97 10 2 8 Traffic 153 46 47 (1) Street Lighting 324 162 150 12 Crossing Guards 135 74 80 (6) Storm Water 31 14 20 (6) Road Structure 175 44 39 5 Roadside Maintenance 70 28 18 10 Summer Road Patrol 57 23 21 2 1,042 401 377 24 Filename: 2004 - JUNE 30 FINANCIAL REVIEW.xIs Sheet Name: Appendix "B" -19- Pagel COUNCIL — JULY 13, 2004 TOWN OF AURORA Quaterly Financial Review Appendix "B" Departmental Progress Report - June 30, 2004 A : g I tl role to . Approved Actuals to Section 2004,Budget (000's) June 30 (000's) (Z ter 8D Winter Services Winter Roads 667 467 604 (137) Winter Sidewalks 180 108 112 (4) Winter Road Patrol 79 55 56 1 926 630 772 (142) 8E Engineering Services - 9 TRANSIT SERVICES - 10 * WORKS CAPITAL 1,302 651 651 11 SANITARY SEWER/ WATER * Sanitary Sewer System (45) (18) (18) * Storm Sewers - - Ballymore Sewage Pump Stn 8 4 6 (1) Bayview Vandorf Swge Pump Stn 11 6 3 3 McKinley Sewage Pump Stn - - 2 (2) Temperance Sewage Pump Stn 10 5 3 2 Bayview Parks Sewage Pump Stn 16 8 - 8 * Water Administration (533) (240) (240) - Watermain System Mtce. 434 217 227 (10) Water Meters 78 31 31 - Bayview Vandorf Booster Stn 21 11 11 - - 24 42 18 12 GARBAGE & RECYCLING Waste Collection & Disposal 821 411 362 49 Recycling 404 202 220 18 1,225 613 582 32 13 LEISURE SERVICES 13A Administration Services Leisure Services Admin. 663 332 321 11 Facilities Administration 181 91 63 28 844 423 384 39 Filename: 2004 - JUNE 30 FINANCIAL REVIEWAs Sheet Name: Appendix "B" —20— Page 2 COUNCIL - JULY 13, 2004 TOWN OF AURORA Quaterly Financial Review Appendix "B" Departmental Progress Report - June 30, 2004 Approved P .o` Actualsto qec d Section 2004 Budget tzct June 30 (000's) n E (000's) �s: 13B Parks Parks Operations 1,577 631 746 (115) Vehicle & Equipment Me. 256 128 125 3 Parks Building -Scanlon Crt 30 15 15 - 1,863 774 886 (112) 13C Community Center Operations (122) (61) 92 (153) 13D Community Buildings 52 Victoria St Building 43 .24 19 5 22 Church St Building 2 1 2 (1) J Woods/McMahon/Factory Thre (9) (5) (10) 5 Victoria Hall (12) (7) (2) (5) Carpenter Shop 62 34 25 9 86 47 34 13 13E Leisure Complex Leisure Complex Administration 275 138 131 7 Complex Building Operations 314 157 139 18 Complex Fitness Centre (197) (99) (123) 24 Complex Aquatics 9 5 67 72 401 201 80 121 13F Special Events Special Events Administration - - 9 (9) Community Recognition Awards 9 5 3 2 Art Aurora 10 5 2 3 Canada Day Celebrations 7 4 22 (18) Santa Claus Parade 13 7 - 7 First Night 11 6 2 4 Arctic Adventure 11 6 3 3 61 33 41 8 13G Community Programs Program Administration 91 46 43 3 Community Programs Admin. (18) (9) (138) 129 Band Concerts - Commun Pgrms 18 9 3 6 Aurora Youth Initiatives 69 35 18 17 Street Sale 6 3 3 166 84 74 158 Filename: 2004 - JUNE 30 FINANCIAL REVIEWAs Sheet Name: Appendix "B" -21- Page 3 COUNCIL - JULY 13, 2004 TOWN OF AURORA Quaterly Financial Review Appendix "B" Departmental Progress Report - June 30, 2004 Approved t - Aotuals to p Section 2004 Budget JDn June 30 (000's) (000's) 13H Aurora Seniors Centre 12 6 19 (13) 131 Leslie Street Property (16) (8) (17) 9 13J Leased Facilities (101) (51) (3) (48) 13K Fire Hall Operations - - 14 LIBRARY 1,846 923 748 175 Library Operations 467 234 196 38 15 56 VICTORIA BUILDING 22 11 5 6 16 PLANNING ADMINISTRATION 492 246 219 27 17 COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT 43 22 7 15 18 CORPORATE REVENUES Investment Revenues (575) (288) (312) 24 Penalty on Taxes (625) (313) (306) (7) Property Tax (16,938) (8,130) (8,130) - Payments In Lieu of Taxes (275) (138) (97) (41) Supplementary Taxes - - - - Promissory Note Interest (920) (460) (462) 2 Contribution from Reserve Fund (40) (20) - (20) CORPORATE EXPENDITURES Operational Contingencies 200 100 31 69 Contribution to Reserves 785 393 460 (67) Tax Write-offs 125 63 69 (6) Net Expenditure (Revenue) $ $ 253 $ 76 aPraecletlSy+'":plu'(.�#tett) $-Men329 Filename: 2004 - JUNE 30 FINANCIAL REVIEW.xIs Sheet Name: Appendix".' -22- Page 4 P x uii `uy%oogyo M U � m 2s S 0 m8 � N 8 S j O m m L6 W CqIR iV u" e q O p nLL V S o a'� 7 N rn o ryryN o rn m 6 S O �M S S S S S S m o 0 0 0 0 0 S o S S S S 6 F PCi O fN0 h n O N S OBI N b p Np�� 00 m O O prj y � N N N Cl n' �6 f L w w w w J ca o Nd,�� go��on"�o� SSmmm E o� ������ yo 11111 11 11111 u r pd d po pd pd yd y o odd d Qo 8 M N' N p O O O O O O O O O O N N N N U v }O W N f o E o miF FLO,N '[T�. nv m n v 3O c— y N §. E � a_ w'2 E�` E d d O.fn m W .. a 5 d d��a€o ra�ov ac _ > Ztwal"U =m o� v oK O. t "lu o C� a� 10 1�0 3n �rnaa ���2 m m oU~a° 0- �su'vi o=. ul n N O cy o N �mgoU EAci NLu �<a C cm aEa m U Sm 5 H `grL C7Ua 3U¢' F-�'u.3`soox"a" L,� O"a¢zu'u. V X E UUUNLIL — JULT 16. ZUU4 m2 to i ov�oo M m�n "� Ina mm "f v mommnm o SIN pff PR mp 0� m o � mm .r- `vg,�vy� arm `gym m`gm,v rvom v� �Z� ory u�m o m�� u�n�vw.`O- u`Oi.ao nMt lV Ig�'oo v N/ my v s p moo Pp oR O pni � CJ N O O ONI O O U is O O O O O O O O l 1 i l 666 ' ,, 66 Y O O p p O p p 'oc m� p o opo oio vi bpi Eno m� 00 p,�o v a i3 CLL q6 Q W �2 a 4 O O O O �O n ft�p W pOj Q Q^ b1 O 000 00 00 p O p p O O O O E a m mrn 0R 60 ry In0 ry u' m ��v mom mom o N,I oi, ryo m"m mw 6 = y >=1 a r 'C ° a 9 N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N Z E- h�: ^7 �'�'��"'7 '77'" '?7"7 "7 '7 '7 '" "7 '7 "7 '7 '7 "7 ��""7 '? '?"71 _M wT '? 9 in 2 7`m, ° om�ddlA di y Nt�l d nn n nos, ri Ihn dm 6 0 Si m m � as U a41 r9 �9 y141 m °l 3 � � LN N4J �j W �rp N � c a. ry 2 9 rn g N a a �i O= �+65 W! N Q C O. Q 3 ooq owl 000�`$� m Lq g� mood om `� o`Dm am �„ 000mom� oao�pe �'+ I� N O 10 m O o V U] Oy e O O N O N O O IO O V N mS 1 v N N N N O M N Mack-- O 1IVD � N a ug � N N 6, 6 oomao eo ' n ti NI' 'E v o m po r' a g o sm o g g lV C� V N N e o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 �o o�o�o 00000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 000�0 0 0 oe o ai o 0 00000 o ai Lq 6LL m o 0 a m o 0 0 00 0 0000$ a o 0 t � N eq a cd Mr N 0 0 'd 6 0 d yNj u pej 'Y O N O n < M O O O N g 0 N O N O T O p q9 vm. O. vJ NGOO�}+l�m q vv000 vbvY1 F c � (VV vv m v�VGG m m V N 6 �j N N V y p m o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 V N N N N N N N N_ N_ 1� N N N N N N N N N N N N OQS VY YY Y Y- YYY YY44YY •y N U m N +? � o � F 2 m I G m c E fl o a Eo y a n m@ c y o N 12 o�°�'i. &°'^1s53P3 O1aY7� osy." m U 2U�' QY 3 U m; ZU K c 0 Q. Q Q q u o0 0�0 2i+imn _o� m oom000 $wm moo, o�oon�a�',rym�oryv y ao m8om omo 0 m o 0o dm � in Cram oa f - 'o vi '�ti - �mm m m� U '=O K 3 w w w K 9 O O S o 0 h N O N Nq odd � i C N C� "eV `o oaoo a o0 0 om � o000 o m o c yGI y�j3 0000 OM M � C J q6 6 mm Q� O OOO O O O O O 9 0000 O O O m' 0000 W N � yO 10- C l' q p4 Q m� m m p op o o � M�yy d o d d pp! m a m d W R N O O O H O O O O M A 5 v�vC� 00N q m&`. M N s°O? e 6 w w N J a °� mdddo$$md dddd a dQ m U LL 6 E E � m g .q 20 E c n a E E� � W F- •_ OFm-a?u�.x�212>F2-mSg jO� mcm .am w'u`>u»o'a�NlN )g03o ui0. a.]>v�E av,� — JULY 13 Z11114 ry wl°., 'a nu`r'i m �Nn or'o o°q mgn?mmr�s se a M1. aZ uNi, y� pS p 899d S N O In N S O O O cs j v h � .O. � mPOCIN�M1O (00 rOO QO ,-Y M roNNNC] O M o m SON,Y 00 Lm O OOO O M MO`N� O W�frO N ON Suers 4 �i,rnno �rn0`���i� mpmpm q9 �n O(o� r��or �IM1�[�V�l7N �OONO v�v�vVN vO v�pN 7 v 6 v J m m� Nyy Yl N� OOO OOp "1 b rNwrno .- O � m�i0 <m "#1 '# "Jill' p7 0- #p### O O o 80. ##### ,,y,y od�`Oro p###### o do3 ### o00 J O '7 U? 'R T L9 .9 L? q 19 '4 "w T m U 1 E ' a N U E W 71 o c & m 75 N m o 0 `o B' a Uaa,o m06 N 3 E i 'S U),m 22 sFaE' o0 a E Ep O J J CJUUO¢ ¢0,0 2d N U K COUNCIL - JULY 13, 2004 cnI(p�� ryNoa�yyo moo`n%� c W rn m�`�i� m w000 0 o W a?N is A� N aic wvi riMm w93 m1° j• .. .. .� ... .. v `. r N q � m W N M w 0 m iV W V u� € s o$ ryin m`a, o oIo m ap o00 o m o m m � cmw woom aro '"ca voi .n-'m wuoim aM�uwoi v m N�ppo o � oo � � N 3S e e ry �V � o 0 0000 0 o c o00 0 0 0 F o �o� o000 0 0 000 00 0 0 0 �1 O 00 O N O O O W O O O O W O O OIn00 O r 000 w r O O N ONpp M O O a v mv�R't m N O O W N W �Ny W N tO qq ow y & o 0 0 0 0 o r 4u 0 o r o r o O o noo o Vm o 0 V p 0p o W po o m m N W` O m N 10 W N N b Y01 p a� a pW mm w R y .- `" -• :{ v n o O W v CI N r OOi N N A N CI " 01 � 6 fV N �" Oj w w w w w J � y O O d n n N N N N N N N N N N N N N M< p M a ''%pp'4 '4 #�# m u#f w i##n 7pp 7 7p W u� do`0005 d `$r`b d"SHE 'S` nQ Q U wa m Z W = n � o i�_` m FL IL F R44 a£ ` ~ an5 u.¢ircnz m"o r3�m m" U7�3>j m'Sma4 d � Q COUNCIL — JULY 13, 2004 Detailed- Review of Specific Expenditures Town of Aurora Full time Part time Overtime Employee Benefits Salaries Costs Budget (000's) Actuals to June 30 (000's) Appendix "D" $ 7,700,644 $ 3,850,322 $ 3,433,730 $ 416,592 $ 2,074,930 $ 1,037,465 $ 1,103,390 $ (65,925) $ 105,598 $ 52,799 $ 35,519 $ 17,280 $ 1,721,372 $ 860,686 $ 942,574 $ (81,888) $ 89,204 $ 44,602 $ 61,724 $ (17,122) $ 11,691,748 $ 5,846,874 $ 6,576,936 $ 268,938 Consulting $ 355,423 $ 177,712 $ 89,449 $ 88,262 Corporate Postage $ 55,000 $ 27,500 $ 32,141 $ (4,641) Water Postage $ 28,020 $ 14,010 $ 9,837 $ 4,173 Corporate Phones $ 90,000 $ 45,000 $ 38,737 $ 6,263 Filename: Book2 Sheet Name:Jun 30 04 Amended:30/06/04 Page 1 of 1 —29— COUNCIL — JULY 13, 2004 AGENDA ITEM # TOWN OF AURORA COUNCIL REPORT SUBJECT: Variance to Sign By-law Aurora United Church — 15186 Yonge Street FROM: Leo J. Grellette, Director of Building Administration DATE: July 13, 2004 RECOMMENDATIONS No. BA04-005 THAT Council approve the site -specific request for a variance to By-law 3400- 92 as it affects 15186 Yonge Street to permit the proposed sign area to increase from the maximum 4.0 mZ to 5.94 ml. BACKGROUND Staff recently received a request from Aurora United Church to vary the sign by-law to permit an increase in sign area from the 4.0 square metres currently permitted to 5.94 square metres. The proposed sign cabinet which is to be located at 15186 Yonge Street measures 4 ft x 8 ft. Each side of the sign will measure 2.97 square metres in area for a total area of 5.94 square metres. The total height of the sign including base and trim is 2.5 M. The applicant wishes to provide a new sign on the south lawn perpendicular to Yonge Street to provide the necessary information and bulletin board to announce Church and Community activities and events. Their plans are to remove the current sign directly in front of the Church as it is in disrepair and needs replacement. In future, it is the applicant's intent to place an antique -looking wooden sign bearing only the Church's name directly in front of the Church. This would meet all requirements set out in the sign by-law, and should enhance the front of the Church property. COMMENTS Staff have reviewed the request and have no concerns with the granting of the variance to permit the increase in sign area. The proposed sign which will be —30— COUNCIL - JULY 13, 2004 July 13, 2004 - 2 - Report No. BA04-005 internally lit as is the existing sign will provide greater visibility and expanded area for the posting of church activities and services. The applicant has indicated that it is proposed to place the internal lights on a timer. In addition the proposed sign will provide addressing that is more prominent than that which presently exists. The applicant in meeting with staff has indicated that the sign is being provided by the largest provided of institutional signs and is intended to provide long term maintenance free signage for the church. Staff have visited the site and are satisfied that the new sign location will not adversely impact sight lines from Tyler street as the sign will be in line with the existing stairs and landscaping that represents conditions abutting Yonge Street OPTIONS Deny the request and enforce the provisions of the current sign by-law. FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS IM CONCLUSIONS Staff have reviewed the application, considered the potential impact and would recommend that the variance request for increased sign area be granted. LINK TO STRATEGIC PLAN Goal B to support a healthy business environment that attracts new business and is responsive to the needs of our present business community. ATTACHMENTS Figure 1 - Application for Variance Figure 2 -Site Plan Figure 3 -Sign Details Figure 4 -Location Plan Figure 5 - Photos of existing signs -31- COUNCIL - JULY 13, 2004 July 13, 2004 - 3 - Report No. BA04-005 PRE -SUBMISSION REVIEW Management Team - July 7, 2004 Prepared by. Leo J Grellette, ext. 4748 Ceo J. Gr lette Director, Puilding Administration -32- COUNCIL - JULY 13, 2004 Date of Application ......May 25, 2004............................................................ Address and Subject Property .......15186 Yonge Street, Aurora. ............................................... Lot:..Lot 9 and Part of Lot 10...... Plan: ... 9............ Conc.#................................................... Owner: ..... Aurora United Church..................................................................................... Address: ... 15186 Yonge Street, Aurora............................................................................. Postal Code: .................................... Telephone Number .... 905-727-1935............................ Owners"s Agent (if any): .... None............................................................................... Address: ........................................................... ............... ................................... Postal Code: ................ ................... Telephone Number:............................................. Nature and extent of relief applied for (state specifically the permission being requested): With reference to Section 12 para 12.3 application to increase the sign area from the maximum 4.0 square meters to 5.94 square meter in size. The proposed sign cabinet measures 4 feet x 8 feet. The base measures 32 inches high. Each side of the sign is 2.97 Square meters (32 square feet) in area. The sign has two sides for a total of 5.94 square meters. The total height of the sign including base and trim is 2.5 meters (8.5 feet). Why is it not possible to comply with the provisions of the sign by-law? To provide the necessary information and a bulletin board to announce Church and Community activities and events. The new sign would be relocated to the south lawn perpendicular to Yonge Street. It will provide better coverage from both directions on Yonge Street along with traffic using Tyler Street. Plans are to remove the current sign directly in front of the Church. It is in disrepair and needs replacing. The intent, at a future date is to place an antique -looking wooden sign bearing the Church name only (maximum height of 2 feet off the ground) directly in front of the Church. This would meet all requirements set out in Section 12.3 including paragraph (b). This will enhance the front of the Church property, exposing more of the Stained Glass windows and architecture that exists on the front of the Church. The existing garden would then accommodate more flowers and shrubs. Overall, this will enhance the appearance of the church while providing needed information and outreach to our congregation and community. Current use of the subject property?: A historical plaque erected by the historical society currently occupies the proposed location of the new sign. The intent is to have this plaque relocated to the southeast comer of the church facing Yonge Street. The proposed location is un-used lawn area. Figure 1 -Application for Variance -33- IL O r A J}p � J }. A D D � D M r .�L9a�J.5 M r � 2 C \7 2 Ixi1 y�j Committee of Rajus=en'L Minor Variance Application A-12-86 �iF D Y T p A .Zy 9�>� .e sue IL -2 u < X A d J S posed Site Plan . p M I p F J 3 S '�` d. • —i� . M Y' � � I Figure 2 -Site Plan .4pprla:w d" as YdTaowir. dam L 2- WITNESS STANDARD 61 WWI CABINET SIZE: 411 ORIGINAL DESIGN Mi1I TaY murac I/M4nPs ad. I➢RIIth'P'Flkwda' OF 19913: P*h/lPjlc UNO kv. b. lLvul fir PIUMING ftorAII.4%. THU r InfrfaM AUTO wM Is NO II Nrb7APPBo lv .i �rk�w�I^JPrt DO d�O`f. ��%f�d.�CATE P'MIM%kIG AN I&MACT M,0 Id IIPN&, VINYL OIL PAiML 1 Wy'w.P'# MORI; 4.9.04 Ld'awoo &II p104U Iusk 416 59rsn'Su94I MPaxa,raPst. L\IY I� lrxcnyr�ra Corprxnifion # 164I12 i"2tI' KIPPIL as; Kkn Ir ?LcMP.11 IN VTI&: ar1sPTI+% e_ i�• P91� " , :d9 b` ✓d P:B21a&,121M -35- Figure -Sign Details COU ON t °} rrvIu�H° IL �. .S. wsa d.x, �° cwi '' °oF`oRo °W� `>G`W�Go¢Es'mG=e3 m mm = �LL��el duimri mm :.'. :�m:m g�`w C am d°mum mwuwLL L. b I 0 yQ U 6 2 W J O � Utiq w H m v /w/� LL 7 [7 LL s Z 0 �g F- �� W 3 CO O N �11J W lV .I N N�0 J II Ca p a� aw m Ul m n/ -36- Figure 3 -Sign Details COUNCIL J LY 1 Flaure4 Loca ]on Plan - Tue Jun 15. 1639'Oe, 2004 - �omm entre Map: Town of Aurora - N Scale.1:4796. Lecrand: ❑ Let- Black Line Map Border- T51ck Hlacl ® Municipal Boundary -Da TM Street Names Oak Ridges Moraine Ba. ❑ Railway- Thick Purple L / ® Hydro Line -Thick Teall I' t. -Town Feature Tekt- Ora ® .Town Feature -Orange. ® River/Stream- Blue Line JIV re 4 - Location Plan -38- Figure 5 - Photos of existing signs �1 i�;� COUNCIL — JULY 13, 2004 I Town of Aurora COUNCIL REPORT No. BA04-006 SUBJECT: Variance to Sign By-law #3400-92 —Rogers Video FROM: Leo J. Grellette, Director of Building Administration DATE: July 13, 2004 RECOMMENDATIONS THAT Council grant a variance to the Town of Aurora Sign By-law 3400-92 as amended, to permit the erection of one additional wall sign with a maximum area of 8.72 square metres on the north wall at 14879 Yonge Street for Rogers Video. BACKGROUND Staff have received a request from International Neon, acting on behalf of Armadale Properties Limited to install an additional wall sign in the location noted on the attached figures. The application is requesting a variance to install additional sign at the front of the building. COMMENTS In reviewing the application staff have determined that replacing the existing Burger King signs does not constitute variances and contrary to the application only one variance is required and that is for the Rogers Video lettering proposed for the centre of the building. The signage proposed at the front of the building as shown on figure is approximately 17 square metres in sign area and comprises only 13 percent of the overall wall. While the maximum number of signs is being exceeded the proposed signage is 3.0 square metres less in area than the total permitted sign area. The applicant therefore requires a variance for the number of signs. While staff are aware that the request will result in additional signage staff are also cognizant that the proposed signage is less than total area permitted and are not objecting to the applicant's request. Staff would further note that the glass area upon which the additional sign is to be placed is being renovated and staff's concern with the supporting of the sign will be addressed through the permit process. —40— COUNCIL - JULY 13, 2004 July 13, 2003 - 2 - Report No. BA04-006 As one of the Town of Aurora's strategic objectives is to enhance efforts to maintain existing business and develop a profile of communicating that Aurora is open for business staff are requesting that Council's grant the variance for the additional sign. OPTIONS • Council could deny the request • Council could approve the request CONCLUSIONS That Council grant the request for one additional wall sign for Rogers Video. FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS H LINK TO STRATEGIC PLAN Goal B: Objective of enhancing efforts to maintain existing business and developing a profile of communicating that Aurora is open for business. ATTACHMENTS Figure 1 -Application for Variance Figure 2 - Location Plan Figure 3 - Wall sign details Figure 4 - Letter from the owner Figure 5 - Site Plan PRE -SUBMISSION REVIEW Management Team Meeting - July 7, 2004 Prepared by. Leo Grellette, ext. 391 Leo J. ref of Building Administration -41- COUNCIL — JULY 2004 Town of Aurora Application For Variance Sign By-law 43400-92 Application must be accompanied by: 1) site plan showing location of all signs both existing and proposed, 2) plans showing the proposed sign configuration and size with full dimensions, (width, height in total, height to underside etc.) and, 3) a cheque in the amount of $150.00 to be non-refundable, 4) - if the sign variance is approved, the applicant is obligated to make an application for a sign permit, please refer to the enclosed permit fee schedule. N.B. Prior to applying for the variance, the applicant should discuss all concerns thoroughly with the Director of Building Administration. Date ofApplication: (� Address of Subject Property: �g�`.l.J.as6�- ......................................................................... Lot: ................................... Plan:..................................... Cone#:.................................... Owner:.¢AALrSaLLE...!.kdP4'-ICJ.4`.1...lM.!.!.!............../.........:.,.t.,.........,,........................... Address:. ..0. `�� �R/vim u�7€ I�7 /.........I .. f.......................................✓................ Postal Code:. �-?4.. Z�cp................................. 'Telephone No:. (✓��5,./ A.4- S . A'.- ?p Owner's Agent (if any): %NizT�r/6zirOnJiF2.....il n!............................................................:..... Address: .. /3E/,...Jt /LiquTM, P. ?c���1,...!?lon rQ?t................. ..................................... Postal Code:. ??(.. �i�3.................................. Telephone No:. OU�...... rq3� ............ L� nas?�L serOidc- . LO,OQDe, &L Nature and extent of relief applied for (state specifically the permission being requested): X; T/an;r?L.. r2E....F.'F...ilc �krsY7v� s/6(✓..�3dk:........ .......I .......... ................................................................................................ I............... Why is it not possible to complywith the provisions of the sign by-law?: cILIE r� ;..Ic �a /eGl[rSEB ei, r„/Su/LJfsL°?..CY ldcc 7n� .. �!..1.5... ?B:............ :............. aie7i/iS� poSSr/�tC s/sJc c F s/fin/ Mae �e�Ge[�/rkrYfLt lts�,.. 4LGOrir�...x.a.. CC...n.!l . 9C.lJ .......... Current use of the subject property?: ,71tc.PA-v!i........:....:.............................................................I....... Signature of Owner/Owner's agent Date —42 Figure 1 —Application for Variance LOCATION PLAN APPLICANT: ROGERS VIDEO FILE: BA04-006 SUBJECT LANDS AURORA BUILDING DEPARTMENT DATE: JULY 13, 2004 FIGURE 2 Location Plan Map create$) the Town of Aurora, July 6th, 2004. Base data provided by York Region. COUNCIL - JULY 13, 2004 z zO _____..__; �Z vZ' m • 6 N � w L9'9 t0490'91 r E n ;d 9 O in w u S ® 2'F F ° 4 Z Q .7 Paz F'S U H oy wv�W YY ND M r (w99'0).919 LZ I O E 0 1 I� N E I b z a m z s k I P W J E ' E I� 4 v n (V Iwss•Ll „s .v o �u u E 0 y w N I I � M H. 3 Figure 3 - Wall sign details COUNCIL - JULY 13, 2004 A01 June 8, 2004 PROPERTIES LIMITED Leo Grellette Director of Building Administration Town of Aurora 100 John West Way Box 1000 Aurora, Ontario L4G 6J1 Dear Mr. Grellette: Re: 14879 Yonge Street, Aurora, Ontario Rogers Video Armadale Properties Limited representing NVS Holdings Limited, (Owner of Hunters Gate Plaza) have reviewed and approve the Rogers Video signage, proposed in the rendering attached. Thank you for your consideration in this matter. Yours truly, Elizabeth Whitton Computer generated signature Elizabeth Whitton, R.P.A. Sr. Property Manager LW:jlm -45- Figure 4 - Letter from the owner COUNCIL - JULY 13, 2004 m 14 nu m n REGULAR PERMIT = Positioning of the proposed Rogers Video signs (not to scale) HUNTERS GATE NORTH SIDE 14879, YONGE STREET AURORA, ONTARIO -46- Figure 5 - Site Plan COUNCIL — JULY 13, 2004 TOWN OF AURORA AGENDA ITEM# 5 COUNCIL REPORT No. ACCESS O4-02 SUBJECT: 04-02 Accessibility Advisory Committee Meeting FROM: Chair John West Committee Members — Catherine Couchman, Vice -Chair; Jim Hamilton, Ivy Henriksen, and John Lenchak DATE: July 13, 2004 RECOMMENDATIONS THAT the Committee Record of the Accessibility Advisory Meeting 04-02 held on June 24, 2004 be received for information; and 2. Universal Barrier Assessment of Town Facilities THAT staff be requested to obtain further information as suggested by the Committee regarding the Universal Barrier Assessment of Town Facilities and report back to the July 29th Committee meeting. 6. Ontarians with Disabilities Act - Update THAT staff inform the Region of York of their support of the proposed workshop to learn about new Ontarians with Disabilities Act, 2001 (ODA); and THAT the Region of York be requested to advise the Committee as early as possible of the proposed date of the workshop. ATTACHMENTS 1. Committee Record 04-02 Prepared by: Karen Ewart, Administrative Co-ordinator Councillor John West, Chair Accessibility Advisory Committee —47— COUNCIL — JULY 13, 2004 I& COMMITTEE RECORD MEETING NO. 04-02 Committee: Accessibility Advisory Committee Date: Thursday June 24, 2004 Time and Location: 3:00 p.m., Holland Room Committee Members: Present: Councillor John West, Chair; Catherine Couchman, Vice -Chair; Jim Hamilton, Ivy Henriksen, and John Lenchak Regrets: Helen Kogan Other Attendees: Bob Panizza, Director of Corporate Services/Town Clerk and Karen Ewart, Administrative Co-ordinator/Deputy Clerk Catherine Couchman, Vice -Chair called the meeting to order at 3:00 p.m. DELEGATION Mr. Albert Paquette of NORR Architects, presented the Committee with the plans for the new Recreation Complex. The Committee reviewed the drawings and provided Mr. Paquette with comments and concerns regarding accessibility to the public with and without special needs. These concerns included, but were not limited to the following: Disabled parking: ➢ insufficient spaces within the current design ➢ the bays should share the walkway frontage so the number of spaces could be doubled ➢ it was suggested that there be 4 bays on each side of the walkway, this would reduce the distance disabled persons will have to travel to the entrance to the facility Main Entrance to be at grade level: ➢ hallway raised with sloped floors — need to be cognizant that some slopes are difficult for people with walkers and wheelchairs ➢ requested material changes and colour changes at curb cuts similar to those use at subway stations in Toronto — this would assist the seeing impaired ➢ lower water fountains for public use - Reception and Snack Bar: ➢ the Committee requested that permanent/affixed benches be installed in the main hallway to provide users a rest location since the main reception will be approximately 120 feet from the entrance and the snack bar 60 feet ➢ lower counters —48— COUNCIL — JULY 13, 2004 Accessibility Advisory Committee Record No. 04-02 Page 2 of 4 Thursday, June 24, 2004 Pathways around the facility should be paved for easier mobility not only for wheelchairs but for strollers, walkers, bicycles etc. Pool Facilities: ➢ if one of the tanks will be used for rehabilitation therapy, the temperature must be between 940F to 960 F ➢ change rooms request family change rooms ➢ emergency exit at south west corner of pool change rooms indicated steps — require graduated ramp in addition to the graduated ramp to be installed at the west side of the building assurance that the tiles used in the change rooms would be non -slip ➢ lower shelves and coat racks in the change rooms ➢ the Committee enquired if the Leisure Complex pool could be retrofitted as a therapy pool once the new facility is fully operational The Committee was requested to review the proposed drawings and forward any concerns to staff by June 30, 2004 to be provided to the architect for consideration. DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST There were no declarations of interest under the Municipal Conflict of Interest Act. MINUTES OF THE PREVIOUS MEETING Accessibility Advisory Committee Minutes Number 04-01 of May 27, 2004. Moved by Catherine Couchman Seconded by John Lenchak THAT Accessibility Advisory Committee Minutes Number 04-01 be approved. CARRIED APPROVAL OF AGENDA Moved by Catherine Couchman Seconded by Ivy Henriksen THAT the content of the agenda as circulated be approved with the addition of the following delegation: ➢ Delegation request from Mr. Albert Paquette Architect for the new Recreation Complex —49— COUNCIL - JULY 13, 2004 TOWN OF AURORA COUNCIL REPORT No. ACCESS O4-02 SUBJECT: 04-02 Accessibility Advisory Committee Meeting FROM: Chair John West Committee Members - Catherine Couchman, Vice -Chair; Jim Hamilton, Ivy Henriksen, and John Lenchak DATE: July 13, 2004 RECOMMENDATIONS THAT the Committee Record of the Accessibility Advisory. Meeting 04-02 held on June 24, 2004 be received for information; and 2. Universal Barrier Assessment of Town Facilities THAT staff be requested to obtain further information as suggested by the Committee regarding the Universal Barrier Assessment of Town Facilities and report back to the July 29th Committee meeting. 6. Ontarians with Disabilities Act - Update THAT staff inform the Region of York of their support of the proposed workshop to learn about new Ontarians with Disabilities Act, 2001 (ODA); and THAT the Region of York be requested to advise the Committee as early as possible of the proposed date of the workshop. ATTACHMENTS 1. Committee Record 04-02 Prepared by: Karen Ewart, Administrative Co-ordinator Councillor John West, Chair Accessibility Advisory Committee -50- COUNCIL - JULY 13, 2004 Accessibility Advisory Committee Record No. 04-02 Page 3 of 4 Thursday, June 24, 2004 MATTERS FOR CONSIDERATION 1. 2003-2004 Accessibility Plan Project Priorities The Committee agreed to postpone discussions regarding the prioritizing of the issues from the Accessibility Plan to the July 29, 2004 Committee meeting, Arrangements were made to conduct a tour of the Town Hall and the Leisure Complex on July 9, 2004 commencing at 9:00 a.m. starting at the Town Hall, to review the public areas of the facility. 2. Universal Barrier Assessment of Town Facilities The Committee reviewed a sample Request For Proposal obtained from the City of Guelph. Moved by Ivy Henriksen Seconded by Catherine Couchman THAT staff be requested to obtain further information as suggested by the Committee regarding the Universal Barrier Assessment of Town Facilities and report back to the July 29th Committee meeting. CARRIED 3. Hiring Policies/Practices Review Correspondence from Jim Hamilton regarding hiring policies and practices review. Moved by Ivy Henriksen Seconded by Catherine Couchman THAT the information pertaining to hiring policies be received for information purposes. CARRIED 4. Sensitivity Training a) Summary of information received from other municipalities and agencies regarding Sensitivity Training; and b) A copy of "A Way with Words and Images", Guidelines for the portrayal of persons with disabilities; and c) Printout of the website home page of Partners in Leisure that is a consortium of service providers and consumers in London, Ontario and Middlesex, Ontario working together to develop a co-ordinated and responsive leisure service system for people with disabilities hftp://www.accessleisure.org/index.php, -51- COUNCIL — JULY 13, 2004 Accessibility Advisory Committee Record No. 04-02 Page 4 of 4 Thursday, June 24, 2004 Moved by Ivy Henriksen Seconded by Catherine Couchman THAT the information pertaining to the Sensitivity Training be received for information purposes. CARRIED 6. Ontarians with Disabilities Act - Update Correspondence from the Region of York regarding the co-ordination by Regional staff of a workshop of local municipalities and their Accessibility Advisory Committees with respect to the Ontarians with Disabilities Act. Moved by Ivy Henriksen Seconded by Jim Hamilton THAT staff inform the Region of York of their support of the proposed workshop to learn about new Ontarians with Disabilities Act, 2001 (ODA); and THAT the Region of York be requested to advise the Committee as early as possible of the proposed date of the workshop. CARRIED OTHER BUSINESS BY MEMBERS Jim Hamilton advised that he would provide the Committee with a copy of the standards for Alternative Format Policy issued by the Province of Ontario. Ivy Henriksen advised the Committee that she would circulate a list of Accessibility Contractors /and Professionals to consider for the needs of the Aurora Accessibility Committee. ADJOURNMENT Moved by Ivy Henriksen THAT the meeting be adjourned at 4:55 p.m. CARRIED The tour of the Aurora Town Hall and the Leisure Complex will be held on July 9, 2004 at 9:00 a.m. commencing at Town Hall. The next regular meeting of the Accessibility Advisory Committee will be held on Thursday, July 29, 2004 at 9:00 a.m. in thE�a�eksand Room. COUNCIL — JULY 13, 200 AGENDA ITEM ,NA July 7, 2004 Mr. Larry Allison Chief Administrative Officer Town of Aurora 100 John West Way P.O. Box 100 Aurora, Ontario L 40 6J1 Dcar. Mr. Allison: Re: Magna Hoedown 2004 Magna International Inc. 337 Magna Drive Aurora, Ontario, Canada L40 7KI TBI (905) 726-2462 Fax (905) 726.7164 I am writing; to request permission for an exemption to the noise by-law for Hoedown 2003 on Saturday, September 18th, 2004 from 5:00pm-1:00am. This year's event ticket, raffle and. silent auction proceeds will go to benefit 11 local not - For -profit and charitable organizations including: Aurora Minor Ball Association; Aurora Minor Hockey Association.; Aurora Skating Club; Aurora Youth Soccer Club; Big Brothers of York; Girls Inc.; Newmarket Soccer Club; Pathways for Children, Youth and Families of York Region; Safehaven Project for Community Living; York Region Abuse Program and York Region Community Safety Village. We anticipate approximately 3,000 guests who come to enjoy a great Texan -style BBQ dinner, dancing, live country music and square dance calling. We are applying for a Special Occasion's Permit and therefore are notifying you of the event. Should you have any questions or require further information, please do not hesitate to contact me at (905) 726-7002, otherwise thank you for your attention to this matter. If you would be so kind to fax (905-7246-2596) me back a, copy of your response at your earliest convenience, it would be greatly appreciated. Many thanks! Yours very truly, Raquel Kerr RECEIVED Assistant to the Chairman of the Board JUL 0 8 2004 /rk ADMINISTRATION -53- COUNCIL — JULY 13, 2004 AGENDA ITEM # 7 'TOWN OF AURORA COUNCIL REPORT No. BA04-007 SUBJECT: Request for Model Home Agreement Preserve Homes Corporation FROM: Leo J. Grellette, Director of Building Administration DATE: July 13, 2004 RECOMMENDATIONS THAT Council authorize the Mayor and Clerk to execute a model home agreement between the Town of Aurora and Preserve Homes Corporation to allow for the construction of 7 model homes prior to registration of their subdivision. BACKGROUND In June of 2000 Council approved a policy that provides for the issuance of model home permits following draft approval of subdivisions, prior to registration. As part of that process, staff prepared a proposed precedent model home agreement that addresses issues related to access, safety, provision of services, provision of marketing information, landscaping and urban design control and other issues that would generally be set out in the subdivision agreement. The precedent agreement also includes a clause wherein the owners are required to post securities to ensure compliance with the agreement and zoning by-laws for the area based on the lot layout outlined on the draft plan. This decision was also premised on the provisions contained within the Ontario Building Code that provide for the issuance of conditional permits where compliance of zoning by- laws will be adhered to, where securities are posted, and where agreements are entered into. COMMENTS Preserve Homes Corporation has now requested the issuance of building permits that would allow the construction of three model homes by Salva Investments Inc., three model homes by Kylemore Homes and one model home by Aspen Ridge Homes (Aurora) Ltd. prior to registration to permit them to proceed with their sales program. —54— COUNCIL - JULY 13, 2004 July 13, 2004 - 2 - Report No. BA04-007 There are provisions in the subdivision agreement to prohibit occupancy of model homes prior to registration, as the intent is not to permit the models to be utilized for human habitation. Staff will, however, ensure that each unit meets the minimum provisions for occupancy as set out in the Ontario Building Code prior to their use as models. OPTIONS Council could deny the request. CONCLUSIONS Staff have no objection to the request for a model home agreement that provides for the issuance of permits for model homes for the proposed subdivision and therefore would recommend that Council authorize the Mayor and Clerk to enter into an agreement with Preserve Homes Corporation. FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS Current Year- nil Future Years - nil LINK TO STRATEGIC PLAN Goal C: Continuing well planned growth. ATTACHMENTS Figure 1 - Location Plan Figure 2 - Model Home Agreement Prepared by; Leo Grellette, ext. 391 Leo J. Gre lette Director of Building Administration -55- COUNCI pY 13 L—.$. 1 QBre Bn 8' mi-i L-:s O mF'w_nn Nn NF Nei NeN N^ry N�09ry NN Nn L n o B'LI 'LI L'R L'EL L'Cl L'CI C£I L'CI L' CLI C'C 2'91 a P U'GL B'91 m m 0'91 Y M 1 N 0'9I 0'S O 0'Sl m °'sl 9p 9D BL m �o� 8Lm B'L{ 0 B'Sl 0'9L 079I 0'91 P V91 0'9 CJ ` sb{L'� C�LOI 86 W p'' a a LbL .. 'BI L'fl Oblri d• Zll" o'el � bl 88 '_^ 'Bt °L BzL� sL Bz 'et o° n IaLA] �-n n�^�-^,-° On °Ve M�I�oIL)e� rl^()n c�fO� B'a 1.a ^rv'af�O fNO• ^ 99 L'CI L' L'CI L'CI L'CI L'CI I L'CI G'Cl L'CI G'Cl C'a{ urrv�Lr G 'YS' S y4' w9' w� Lf=, �3als iw ��MNI ^I 'BI��I in i.B9L m�I B'.r0 'mGB LmB CBI 'B eB pp 1 I I +'`sWrz C'LI L'CI G'CL L'fl CTI L'CI '91 921 6. m ry Z rv°QI f °�°Qa Co,l% Y 1'y�� InGjN aB mol jry N�INa M �r mr r m 12 Z o I n a w 'aa"n eub'9o'nY t n n q in a 'y u�inC Ewa a a a 5 9"0 ,B rB c•a R eLz c° i clf ' L m 'a IrB cB Jw� a R' u0 9O nL os ret f'fiZ G'I W a� 4 m E E m m E Fd m ppm b n 1 pmp mI m B. f0 1° I„ it Z'Be C I$ $ o m Sp 6Ld 5'BCH '6L C'IC J 0'29 w E n �.me - U1 '� 6 LM tj R M z -z L0'6 bo 8 J a m $ n J R W n m arjm � 6eC£ m. EO m m� I h I I Ita d; N r91 10 hm 9 e'BeDO .a a P & aP b T'Bc .6C Q' T,BT • 1< - _ .. H B Ba'9aTa ' 9Z -lH 9Z-18 M LZ-1H 9Z- 8 9 � w0'a 9 n w0'Ba' 56— Figure 1 Location Plan COUNCIL - JULY 13, 2004 THIS AGREEMENT made this day of 1200 BETWEEN and - PRESERVE HOMES CORPORATION (hereinafter called the "Owner") PARTY OF THE FIRST PART THE CORPORATION OE THE TOWN OF AURORA (hereinafter called the "Town") PARTY OF THE SECOND PART WHEREAS the Owner is the registered owner of the Lands subject to Draft Plan of Subdivision D12-01-5A (the "Draft Plan"); AND WHEREAS the Owner has requested permission to construct seven (7) model homes prior to the registration of the Draft Plan; NOW THEREFORE this Agreement witnesseth that in consideration of the mutual covenants hereinafter expressed and other good and valuable consideration, the Parties hereto agree one with the other as follows: PART 1 GENERAL CONDITIONS The lands affected by this Agreement are described on Schedule "A" attached hereto (the "Lands'). 1.1 The Town hereby agrees to the erection, by the Owner (or its authorized agents, employees, consultants or contractors) of three (3) residential dwellings by Salvia Investments Inc., three (3) residential dwellings by Kylemore Homes In Trust and one (1) residential dwelling by Aspen Ridge Homes (Aurora) Ltd. to be utilized as model homes and sales office facilities - - - -- -- - -- - - - - - - - - (hereinafter the- "model -homes" -or-individually called a "model. home") prior to the registration of the Draft Plan, subject to issuance of Building Permits therefor and subject to the terms and conditions of this Agreement. 1.2 The Owner hereby covenants and agrees to construct the model homes in compliance with all applicable by-laws and regulations and to make the necessary applications to the Town to obtain building permits prior to commencement of such construction, provided that each model home shall only be constructed on a residential dwelling Lot shown on and laid out by the Draft Plan. 1.3 The Owner covenants and agrees that, in the event that it is found that any of the model homes have not been constructed in compliance with all applicable by-laws and regulations (the "non -complying model home'), at any time during the currency of this Agreement, or, notwithstanding section 1.14 below, after the registration of the Plan of Subdivision, they will seek the approval from the Committee of Adjustment for the Town for any required minor variances prior to any occupancy of any non -complying model home. In the event that the said minor variances are not approved by the Committee of Adjustment or the Ontario Municipal Board, as applicable, the Owner further covenants and agrees that the non- complying model home will be demolished by the Owner at the Owner's expense. Should the Owner neglect or refuse to demolish the said non -complying model home forthwith, the Owner hereby grants permission to the Town to enter upon the lands and to do the said work at the Owner's expense. -57- Flaure 2 - Model Home Agreement COUNCIL - JULY 13, 2004 Page 2 1.4 It is understood and agreed that this Agreement is for the purpose of erecting seven (7) model homes prior to the registration of a Plan of Subdivision and therefore, the Owner covenants with the Town that there shall be no Agreements of Purchase and Sale entered into which would have the effect of requiring residential occupation of the model homes by purchasers prior to the registration of the Plan. 1.5 The Owner covenants and agrees to submit to the Town, upon execution of this Agreement, a Letter of Credit (or Letters of Credit) calculated at the rate of Ten Thousand Dollars ($10,000.00) per model home. The Owner agrees that such security constitutes an earnest to ensure performance of this Agreement in the event of breach of this Agreement by the Owner, but provision of such security does not limit the Owner's liability should damages resulting from the Owner's breach exceed the value of the security. 1.6 In the event that the Owner, in the opinion of the Director of Building Administration for the Town (hereinafter the "Director"), breaches anyprovision of this Agreement, the Owner agrees that the Town, through its employees, agents or contractors, may in its sole discretion, draw upon and utilize the security to perform any obligations of the Owner pursuant to this Agreement or to redress harm or damages that have occurred ormay occur from said breach or breaches, provided however that the Director has first given the Owner ten (10) calendar days notice in writing of such breach, without steps to redress the breach, satisfactoryto the Director, having been taken by the Owner. 1.7 Use ofthe securityby the Town shall not relieve the Owner of any of its obligations pursuant to this Agreement. 1.8 The Town and its licensees, employees, agents and contractors, may at any time enter on any part of the Lands to perform, at the Owner's expense using the security provided in this Agreement, any of the Owner's obligations pursuant to this Agreement. 1.9 The Owner covenants and agrees to submit to the Town, upon execution of this Agreement, a cheque in the amount of Nine Hundred, Seventy -Five Dollars ($975.00) as a legal fee for the preparation of this Agreement, which includes GST. Any and all further costs relating to the registration of this Agreement shall be home solely by the Owner. 1.10 No condoning, excusing, overlooking or delay in acting upon by the Town of any default, breach or non -observance by the Owner at any time or times in respect of any covenant, proviso or condition in this Agreement shall operate as a waiver of the Town's rights under this Agreement in respect of any such or continuing subsequent default, breach or non- observance and no waiver shall be inferred from or implied by anything done or omitted by the Town except an express waiver in writing. 1.11 The Owner acknowledges that this Agreement does notpredetermine, prejudice or constrain the Town's jurisdiction with respect to the approval, rejection or imposition of conditions in relation to any development approvals that are now or that may in future be proposed for the Property. Without limiting the generality of the foregoing, this Agreement does not predetermine, prejudice or constrain the Town's jurisdiction with respect to the approval, rejection or imposition of conditions related to final approval of the draft Plan of subdivision in respect of the Property. 1.12 The Owner agrees that it will comply with all applicable legislation in performance of the obligations contemplated in this Agreement. Without limiting the generality of the foregoing, the Owner agrees to complywith all Town By-laws, including the Topsoil Preservation By-law, and to obtain all approvals required of other bodies having jurisdiction, including the Lake Simcoe Region Conservation Authority, the Ministry of Environment, the Ministry of Natural Resources and Aurora Hydro Connections Limited. 1.13 The Town and its licensees, employees, agents and contractors, may in accordance with applicable legislation, enter on any part of the Lands at any time to inspect the Lands to ensure compliance with any of the terms of this Agreement. COUNCIL - JULY 13, 2004 Page 3 1.14 This Agreement shall remain in force and effect until such time as all of the obligations herein have been fulfilled or until the Plan of Subdivision and an accompanying Subdivision Agreement are registered against the Lots as set out in Section 1.1 above, whichever shall occur first in time. Where a Subdivision Agreement is registered against the said Lots, such agreement shall supersede this Agreement in its entirety, but subject to the provisions ofsection 1.4 above. PART 2 GRADING CONDITIONS 2.1 The Owner covenants and agrees to prepare individual lot grading plans for each of the Lots which shall provide grading details that conform with the overall grading control plan of the Plan of Subdivision, as approved by the Director of Public Works for the Town. No building permits will be issued until these plans are approved by the Owner's Engineer and submitted to, reviewed and accepted by the Town. The lot grading plan shall identify the location of trees required to be preserved on each of the Lots in accordance with the overall Tree Preservation Plan. 2.2 The grading of the lands shall be carried out in general conformance with the elevations and spot levels shown on the individual lot grading plan as approved by the Owner's Engineer and in general accordance with the Town's design -criteria, standards, specifications and good engineering practices. The Owner shall be responsible for ensuring that the grading is carried out as noted in this clause. 2.3 To ensure compliance with the requirements contained in section 2.2 the Owner covenants and agrees that, upon execution of this Agreement, the Letter of Credit posted under Section 1.5 herein may be drawn on by the Town as required if, in the opinion of the Director, there is found to be non-compliance with these conditions on any lot and such draw may be retained by the Town as liquidated damages for the breach of section 2.2, and not as a penalty. This Letter of Credit, or so much of same as remains, will be returned when the Subdivision Agreement for the Lots is registered on title and all conditions therein pertaining to grading and occupancy have been completed to the satisfaction of the Director. PART 3 BUILDING CONDITIONS 3.1 The Owner agrees _that _a building permit will only be issued upon compliance with the Ontario Building Code Act and the Ontario Building Code and all applicable legislation and regulations and upon compliance with all requirements other than the registration ofthe Draft Plan. The Owner covenants to register the Plan of Subdivision as expeditiously as possible. PART 4 BUILDING DEPARTMENT CONDITIONS 4.1 The Owner hereby covenants and agrees that, before being entitled to be issued any building permits for the model homes, the Owner must provide access for firefighting and a sufficient water supply, as approved by Central York Fire Services, provided however that apaved road may not be required in order'to ensure a means of access and egress to the Lands. 4.2 The Owner shall be entitled to erect one dwelling unit on each of the said Lots, and each dwelling unit erected pursuant to this Agreement shall comply with the Town's applicable zoning by-law and other applicable law with reference to the Lot as defined on the Draft Plan on which the model home is to be constructed. 4.3 Prior to the issuance of each Building Permit, the Owner shall pay the applicable Building Permit fee and development charges and shall agree to provide cash -in -lieu of land to the Town in accordance with the Town's parkland policy and by-law (being a by-law to require land or cash -in -lieu thereof for park or other public recreational purposes as a condition of development or redevelopment of land). -59- COUNCIL - JULY 13, 2004 Page 4 4.4 The use of the said Lots shall be restricted to: a) Parking of motor vehicles; b) Sales office; and c) Model Home display. 4.5 No connection shall be made to sanitary or storm sewers, water or hydro services without the approval of the Town. 4.6 Temporary hydro services may be arranged with the relevant authority in compliance with its requirements. 4.7 The Owner covenants and agrees that no flags or banners will be displayed on any part of the buildings or site unless prior approval has been obtained from the Director. 4.8 The Owner agrees that where a model home is to be used for the purpose of marketing and selling residential units sufficient parking shall be provided adjacent to the Lands, with a minimum of 15 parking spaces located off all travelled roadways and constricted to the satisfaction of the Director. The Owner shall be aware that on -street parking will not be permitted by the Town. 4.9 The Owner agrees that there will be no construction or placing of temporary sales trailer(s) on large lots or blocks within the draft approved Plan of Subdivision. PART 5 PLANNING CONDITIONS 5.1 The Owner agrees that where a model home is to be used for the purpose of marketing and selling residential units prior to the issuance of a permit for said model, the Owner shall submit and obtain the written approval of the Director of Planning for the Town of Aurora with respect to the display plans including the location of parks, schools, surrounding uses, and other such matters as may be required by the Planning Department of the Town. PART 6 URBAN DESIGN CONDITIONS 6.1 The Owner covenants and agrees to construct and landscape the Lots in accordance with the approved Subdivision Streetscape Plans as coordinated with the approved Composite Utility Plans. 6.2 The Owner covenants and agrees to construct the units in conformity with the approved Architectural Design Guidelines as prepared by Watchorn Architect. 6.3 The Owner covenants and agrees that plans submitted for model home permits for any building within the Draft Plan shall bear an approval stamp identifying the Architectural Company retained for Architectural Control and the signature of the Control Architect. The approval stamp shall certify that the floor plans, building elevations and site plans are designed in accordance with the approved Architectural Design Guidelines. PART 7 INDEMNITY AND INSURANCE 7.1 The Owner hereby indemnifies and holds harmless the Town from and against any and all actions, suits, claims and demands and from all losses, costs, charges and expenses, including legal and adjusting expenses, which may be brought against or made upon the Town by any party whatsoever, including but not limited to damages under the Occupier's Liability Act, or successor legislation thereto, or which may be incurred, sustained or paid by the Town in consequence of entering into this Agreement and the Owner's construction of the model homes (the "Claims"). COUNCIL - JULY 13, 2004 Page 5 7.2 The Owner covenants to respond to and defend all Claims on the Town's behalf regardless of the Owner's perception or opinion of its liability or negligence in relation to the person or the entity making the Claims. 7.3 The Owner further covenants and agrees not to make any claims, demands, or institute any actions whatsoever against any other persons that may claim contribution or indemnity under the provisions of the Negligence Act (as amended) from the Town. 7A The Owner further covenants that they shall maintain liability insurance satisfactory to the Town in which the Town is named as an insured with respect to any and all claims for which the Owner is liable to indemnify the Town hereunder, in amounts equal to or in excess of the following minimum requirements and shall file with the Town a Certificate of Liability Insurance evidencing such requirements. The Liability Insurance shall, at a minimum, contain the following requirements (a) have a limit of liability of not less than $5,000,000.00 for any one occurrence; (b) be comprehensive liability insurance covering all operations and liability assumed pursuant to this Agreement; (c) be endorsed to provide that the policy will not be altered, cancelled or allowed to lapse without thirty (30) days prior written notice to the Town; and (d) contain a cross -liability clause. IN WITNESS WHEREOF the parties have hereunto affixed their corporate seals attested by the hands of their respective proper officers duly authorized in that behalf. THE CORPORATION OF THE TOWN OF AURORA Jones, Mayor Bob Panizza, Town Clerk PRESERVE R j CORPORATION Per: Name: FRAW NELWNNS0+ Title: -- Name: Title: (TIWe have authority to bind the Corporation) -61- COUNCIL - JULY 13, 2004 SCHEDULE 'A' Description of Lands Page 6 All and singular that certain parcel or tract of land and premises situate, lying and being in the Town of Aurora, in the Regional Municipality of York, as shown on the draft plan of subdivision filed with the Town of Aurora as File No. D12-01-5A, and being composed of the following: Part Lot 21, Concession 2 Designated as Part of Part 1 on Plan 65R15767 Save & Except Parts 5 & 6 on Plan 65R20504, Part 1 on Plan 65R-20505, Part 1 on Plan 65R20506, Part 1 on Plan 65R23618 Town of Aurora, Regional Municipality of York -62- COUNCIL - JULY 13, 2004 AGE�JDA ITEM # g 'TOWN OF AURORA COUNCIL REPORT SUBJECT: Hydro One Electric Power Supply to York Region FROM: Sue Seibert, Director of Planning Larry Allison, C.A.O. DATE: July 13, 2004 RECOMMENDATION: No. PL04-086 THAT Council request that the following actions be undertaken by Hydro One prior to its determination of a preferred alternative for the upgrade of the supply of electricity to serve northern York Region: 1) Hydro One undertake, as part of the Class Environmental Assessment Process, a fully documented identification and assessment of all possible routes and options for expanded power transmission capacity to northern York Region, including the use of other transmission corridors supplying northern York Region, the use of existing and proposed Ministry of Transportation corridors such as Highway's 404, 400 and future 427, pursuing new corridors on rural lands, undergrounding of systems, and other alternatives; 2) Hydro One, in evaluating all alternatives, give greater consideration to environmental, social and economic impacts on existing and future urban areas and established and future residential communities, including schools adjacent to and in close proximity to the proposed transmission lines, and a lesser consideration to the factor of cost; 3) Hydro One, in considering any alternatives within existing urban areas undertake further detailed analysis relating to: a) The criteria set out in Section 41 of the Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Plan for the approval of an infrastructure project, such as a new or upgraded transmission line: b) A full inventory and assessment of natural features and wildlife corridors and functions that would be potentially affected by construction activities and transmission corridor operations and relationship to adjacent urban development; c) An assessment of the impact of the proposal on the intended use of the Hydro One transmission corridor for future trail system activity linkages within urban areas; -63- COUNCIL - JULY 13, 2004 Julv 13. 2004 -2- No. PL04-086 d) An assessment of the visual impact of the power transmission towers in an established urban environment, including an assessment of the potential economic impact on homeowners and the loss of enjoyment of residential yards that are in proximity to the hydro corridors; e) Review, with Transport Canada, the compliance of tower transmission heights with respect to Transport Canada Airport zoning regulations; t) Provide information on the effects of electromagnetic fields (EMFs) on human health; disclose the relative EMFstrength emanating from the proposed 230 kV line; undertake a health risk assessment of the proposal in relation to adjacent urban land uses, in particular residential uses, schools and parks; and identify mitigating measures that would ensure that any proposed changes in transmission capacity will not increase the public's exposure to EMFs; g) A determination as to whether there are alternative strategies available to provide the required supply including routing of supply circuit(s) on existing infrastructure emplaced by local utilities on the Regional Road network. 2. That Council request notice of and the opportunity to be represented at any meetings to be arranged by the Regional Chair with the appropriate Ministers to discuss the issues arising out of the Hydro One proposal; 3. That any correspondence received from the Regional MedicalOfficerofHealth commenting on the health issues relating to EMFs be placed on the Town's website for public information; 4. That Town and Hydro staff continue to participate in discussions with the impacted municipalities and the Region to discuss a common response to the Hydro One proposal; and 5. That the Clerk forward a copy of this resolution to the Premier of Ontario, the Minister of the Environment, the Minister of Energy, the Minister of Health and Long -Term Care, the Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing, York Region MPPs, the York Region District School Board, the York Region Catholic District School Board, the Independent Electricity Market Operator and to the Region of York and other affected local municipalities. BACKGROUND: COMMENT: On April 20, 2004, Council received as information a presentation made by Hydro One about their proposed new transmission line to serve the growing need for electricity in York Region. (See attachment # 1) The proposed new line would replace existing 115 kilovolt (kV) lines with 230 kV transmission lines to fi4 increase capacity to this area. The transmission COUNCIL — JULY 13, 2004 July 13, 2004 - 3 - Report No. P11-04.086 lines needed to transmit 230 kV are higher than the existing lines ranging in height from 135 ft to 144 feet depending upon the design of tower selected. This compares with the current 80 foot towers. Hydro One does not need approvals from the Town of Aurora to construct this line. They have however met with staff to inform them of the proposed upgrades and made a presentation to Council in April as noted above. The process they are subject to is a Class Environmental Assessment Process and Ontario Energy Board approvals. The Class Environmental Approval process requires that at least two alternative be considered. Alternative 1 involves upgrading and replacing the existing line from Markham to Newmarket while alternative 2 is the replacement of the existing line from Vaughan to Newmarket. The Environmental Assessment process requires public consultation and this took place this past spring in the form of Public Information Centres held in Markham, Newmarket, Vaughan and King. The Environmental Assessment process requires that: various data about the area effected be collected; alternative methods be identified and evaluated based on environmental, technical and cost impacts; and, that the Environmental Study Report be filed with the Ministry of Environment when the public consultation process is complete. After the EA is filed with MOE, a "bump up" request can be filed. The Minister of Environment can either grant the "bump up" or approve the project. If the "bump up" is granted the proponent must undertake an individual EA requiring the approval of a third party Consolidated Hearing Board through a public hearing. A chart illustrating the process is attached. (Attachment # 2) Two additional public information sessions have been held in Aurora, June 10, 2004 and June 29, 2004. A session on Electric and Magnetic Fields (EMF) was held in Markham on June 16, 2004. (Agenda and hand out information rec'd only) Minutes of those meetings, as available at the time of preparation of,this report are attached. (Attachment # 3) Public concerns at the various meetings centred around health issues related to EMF effects, real estate values, methodology of establishing options, the potential to put transmission underground, communication, rate of growth, proximity to schools, height of towers, aesthetics of the towers and potential for towers to be knocked down. Various municipalities have prepared staff reports and Councils has passed resolutions expressing concern with the proposed new transmission lines. Copies of reports available at the time of preparation of this report are attached. (Attachment # 4) As a result of broad public concern and resolutions passed by various Councils, Hydro One is establishing an advisory group that will review alternative means of meeting electricity supply needs for the Region. They have agreed to expand the options to be considered through the Environmental Assessment and include existing transmission corridors, the highway 400 series corridors, a GO transit corridor and new rights of way selected to avoid urban areas. The advisory group will consist of municipal representatives as well as representatives of citizen groups. Staff will attend meetings and keep Council abreast of developments as they arise. Attachment # 5 is a map provided by Hydro One indicating all alternatives being considered. —65— COUNCIL — JULY 13, 2004 13. 2004 - 4 - . Report No. PL04-086 Planning Issues: Oak Ridges Moraine: The existing electric transmission line corridor in Aurora traverses portions of the Oak Ridges Moraine that are designated "Natural Linkage Area", "Countryside" and "Settlement Area". Prior to the approval of an infrastructure project, such as a new or upgraded transmission line, criteria set out in Section 41 of the Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Plan must be addressed. In accordance with Section 41, an applicant must demonstrate that the following criteria have been met should proposed undertaking be located within the "Natural Linkage Area": ■ The need for the project has been demonstrated and there is no reasonable alternative. This is typically addressed through an Environmental Assessment Act process described above. ■ Area of construction will be kept to a minimum. ■ Right of way widths will be kept to a minimum. ■ The project will allow for wildlife movement. ■ The planning, design, and construction practices adopted will keep any adverse effects on the ecological integrity of the Plan Area to a minimum. In addition should the undertaking cross a "Key Natural Heritage Feature/Hydrologically Sensitive Feature' an applicant must demonstrate that the following criteria have been met: • the need for the project has been demonstrated and that there is no reasonable alternative. Need shall be met through the Environmental Assessment Act, Planning Act, Condominium Act, .Local Improvement Act approval processes or other applicable processes; ■ the planning, design and construction practices adopted will keep any adverse effects on the ecological integrity of the Oak Ridges Moraine to minimum; ■ the design practices adopted will maintain, and where possible improve or restore, key ecological and recreational linkages, including the trail system referred to in Section 39, of the Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Plan; ■ the landscape design will be adapted to the circumstances of the site and use native plant species to the greatest extent possible, especially along rights of way; and I ■ The long-term landscape management approaches adopted will maintain, and where possible improve or restore, the health, diversity, size and connectivity of the key natural heritage feature or hydrologically sensitive feature. Hydro One is responsible for providing the necessary documentation to address the above noted criteria and any other applicable criteria in the Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Plan during the Environmental Assessment process. COUNCIL — JULY 13, 2004 July 13, 2004 .5. Report No. PL04-086 Compatibility with Residential Uses: The Hydro One Corridor runs through several residential neighbourhoods within the Town. It was well known that the right of way contained a 44 kV transmission line when developments were considered and approved. In fact OPA # 6 the Bayview Wellington Centre Plan and OPA # 28, the Bayview Wellington North Secondary Plan and OPA # 61 North Bayview Residential Neighbourhood Secondary Plan provided specific polices noting the use of the Hydro Right of Way for electric power transmission and providing for the use of the Hydro Right of Way for parks and open space and other complementary uses. (See attachment # 6) Specific policies in OPA # 28 also require deeper rear yard depths to accommodate any required mitigative measures such as berming, landscaping, and fencing, in addition to providing sufficient outdoor amenity area for lots backing onto the Hydro corridor while in other cases more general polices of buffering and fencing apply. The Hydro right of way is clearly shown on both Official Plan and Zoning By-law Schedules and labelled as such. It is noted that all applications are routinely circulated to Hydro One or its predecessor agency. While comments have in all cases been provided, warnings of expected transmission capacity increase were not noted for purchasers. Other Matters: Aurora Hydro has advised that there is the need to understand that if as a result of a long approval process, the'transmission line upgrade is delayed past the target date of winter 2006/2007, then utilities in the north end of York Region will be impacted by lower reliability issues (power outages, voltage problems) as well as not being able to connect additional load. They further note that Hydro One will probably impose a load moratorium until such time as the line upgrade is completed. OPTIONS: Staff have prepared a resolution for Council's consideration based along the lines of the one passed by the Region of York. Council can add to this or delete matters they disagree with. CONCLUSIONS: Hydro One has proposed to increase its transmission capacity for York Region in order to respond to increased demands brought about by growth within the Region. It is noted in that context that Aurora's growth is and has been consistent with growth projections as a result of Council's long-standing policy of controlled growth. Notwithstanding that, Aurora Hydro has advised that we could be impacted by load moratoriums. Staff have carried out a review of most plans of subdivision through which the Hydro Right of Way extends and note that while Town documents reference the existence of the right of way, warnings of impending up grades to transmission capacity was not made known to Town staff by Hydro One or its predecessor, nor were warnings to purchasers provided for. —67— COUNCIL — JULY 13, 2004 2004 WE No. PL04-086 As noted above, Hydro One have now set up a Public Advisory Committee that will examine a broader set of alternatives which is positive. Staff will keep Council abreast of any new initiatives that come out of that exercise. It is however suggested that trade offs will be involved in the various alternatives that may not meet the objectives of all parties. FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS: The continued monitoring and participation in this process involves staff time and causes other priories to be reordered. LINK TO STRATEGIC PLAN: The Strategic Plan has a goal of well -planned growth. ATTACHMENTS: Attachment 1 Presentation to Council dated April 20, 2004 Attachment 2 Chart Illustrating Class Environmental Assessment Process Attachment 3 Minutes and Materials from Meetings as Available Attachment 4 Staff Reports and Resolutions from Markham, King, Region of York Attachment 5 Map From Hydro One Illustrating All Available Alternatives Attachment 6 Town Official Plan Policies From Secondary Plan (one only provided) PRE -SUBMISSION REVIEW: Management Team June 9, 2004 Prepared by. Sue Seibert, Director of Planning Extension 4341. LarryAllison, C.A.O. Extension 4744 S e 61benF, MCIP, RPP Director of Planning COUNCIL - JULY 13, 2004 RM ^W' 9% ATTACNMENTI .c: D O A LJ O L..L D a 0 c O a to 0 O N O N .L a COUNCIL - JULY 13, 2004 N -70- COUNCIL - JULY 13, 2004 9 a M -71- COUNCIL - JULY 13, 2004 �5 O 4w H y v N � 0 Poo s� ry M -72- COUNCIL - JULY 13, 2004 h N � N � U_ c > O O O c •c_ O c 0 N a O a) v c c Q m 2) c �C3 O O m O N a� 'Lu 0 •`—' •u v O a CD -a ::E-ce a- CIE LL LL W m O � N 0 �. O O O Lo Q O a N 0 O CN V > �' � > Q -, Z -73- COUNCIL — JULY 13, 2004 M —74— COUNCIL - JULY 13, 2004 N �e O N -0 .L Z ___ v o 1 M O CV C3 Q U L O N W L N O Q Qi a •= O c c= U �— u" O O L a)U E s•N 0 N o E c: 0 o O Q V N O _ C _ U O a N W O N - v c V E= cif O U , c zt) -75- Hydro one Electric rower suppry to corn mugwn COUNCIL - JULY 13, 2004 Figure 1 Class Environmental Assessment Process Establish Need Select System Options Ezemptm IndWidud BA Status under EA Act? Class EA Study Area Definition Initial Notification I ATTACHMENT 2 Apply Screening Criteria Inventory Environment J~ No� Out? Identify & Evaluate Options! Alternatives Select Preferred Alternative & Prepare Draft Environmental Study Report Individual EA --Bump Up by Hydro One Individual EA 4— Bump Up by Minister Final Notification I3o day review (minimum) Review & Issue Environmental Study Report Proceed with Undertaking (including monitoring) Planning and Economic Development Committee June 16, 2004 Yee 5 -76- COUNCIL - JULY 13, 2004 ATTACHMENT 3 Community Meeting Re: "Hydro One Transmission Expansion Project" hosted by: Councillor Phyllis Morris Deputy Mayor, Town of Aurora Aurora Town Hall, Council Chambers Thursday, Jone 10, 2004 7:00 p.m. Informal time — Opportunity to sign -in and review Hydro One Information Boards and other hand-outs "Main Floor Lobby" 7:15 p.m. Welcome & Introductions - Councillor Phyllis Morris 7:20 p.m. Opening Comments - Meeting Facilitator: Mr. David R. Hardy, B.A. (Hons.), M.E.S., M.C.I.P, R.P.P. "Hardy Stevenson and Associates Limited" 7:25 p.m. Aurora Hydro Mr. Iry Klajman, Director of Engineering and Operations Information re: Upcoming Public Meeting, June 29`^ 7:30 p.m. Hydro One Presentation by: Mr. Gary Schneider Manager, Transmission Approvals 7:50 p.m. "STOP" -Aurora Branch Introduction: Ms. Sue Fusco Comments by: Ms. Jennifer Cooper 8:00 P.M. Aurora Ratepayer Associations / Representatives Comments / Questions 8:20 p.m. Community Q & A Period 9:30 p.m. Closing Remarks - Councillor Phyllis Morris DO YOU WISH TO BE NOTIFIED OF FUTURE DEVELOPMENTS? To be notified of any future news / meetings regarding this matter, please ensure you have signed the attendance/notification sheet provided by Hydro One located in the main lobby. 1.1 —77— COUNCIL — JULY 13, 2004 NAZISM Maim AURORA COMMUNITY MEETING —JUNE 10, 2004 RE: HYDRO ONE'S SUPPLY TO YORK REGION TRANSMISSION STUDY This report is a summary of the presentations, public comments and questions received during the facilitated community meeting held on the evening of June 10, 2004 at the Aurora Town Hall, regarding Hydro One's Supply to York Region Transmission Study, based on notes taken at the meeting. (See meeting agenda appended to this summary) Names of individual citizens providing comments were not recorded. This report does not include comments submitted on comment sheets, by email or by telephone. Responses to questions posed at this meeting will be addressed by Aurora Hydro, Hydro One Networks and the Town at the public Information meeting to be held at the Aurora Town Hall on the evening of June 29. Answers to questions directed to Hydro One Networks will also be posted on Hydro One's web site following the June 29 meeting. In addition to approximately 300 residents, the following representatives were in attendance Elected Officials Phyllis Morris, Deputy Mayor, Town of Aurora (Meeting host) Frank Scarpittl, Deputy Mayor, Town of Markham Aurora Hydro representatives Iry Klajman, Director of Engineering and Operations Hydro One Networks representatives Enza Cancilla, Manager Public Affairs Roger Glass, Manager, Environment & Safety Mehrgan Mazaheri, Manager, Engineering & Construction Services Briah McCormick, Manager, Environmental Services & Approvals Carrie -Lynn Ognibene, Senior Advisor, Corporate Relations Farooq Qureshy, Team Leader, System Development Gary Schneider, Manager Transmission Approvals Mike Sheehan, Vice President, Land, Buildings, Services and Security Facilitator David Hardy, Hardy Stevenson and Associates Limited Pam Foster (note -taker), Hardy Stevenson and Associates Limited I" COUNCIL - JULY 13, 2004 MEETING NOTES Welcome and Introductions were conducted by Deputy Mayor Phyllis Morris, Town of Aurora Facilitator David Hardy addressed the audience and outlined the agenda for the evening. Mr. Iry Klajman, Director, Engineering and Operations, Aurora Hydro, advised the audience about the June 29 public information meeting that Aurora Hydro will host to obtain further input on this transmission line study. A presentation was delivered by Mr. Gary Schneider, Manager of Transmission Approvals, Hydro One. He noted that York Region has been experiencing exceptionally high growth over the last 10 years. In response, the local electric utilities in York Region and Hydro One have identified the need for additional electrical transmission facilities. Based on projected electrical load growth rates provided by the local utilities, it is expected that Hydro One's current transmission facilities will reach their capacity by the winter of 2006/2007. At this time, the demand for electricity will begin to exceed the amount of power Hydro One can reliably supply to local utilities for distribution to their customers, particularly in circumstances where one of the two existing 230 kV supply lines serving the region is out of service. To avoid potential brownouts and blackouts, Hydro One is proposing construction of an additional two circuit 230 kV transmission line for the region. Mr. Schneider explained the several alternatives being examined. One alternative would involve redeveloping the current 115 kV right-of-way running through Aurora to accommodate a double circuit 230 kV line. This would mean taller towers. He noted that there is no preferred alternative at this time. Mr. Schneider also stated that Hydro One's consultation process has been extended over the summer months. It is Hydro One's intention to meet with all stakeholders who have concerns about the project, to understand and document the concerns, and to mitigate the concerns to the extent reasonably possible. Mr. Schneider stated that he hoped Hydro One would be in a position to recommend a preferred transmission line route by the Fall. Once the recommended route is announced, Mr. Schneider explained the steps involved to complete the Environmental Assessment process, and the requirement to obtain Ontario Energy Board approval for the project. Both of these processes offer additional opportunities for stakeholder input. Public Comments & Questions The remainder of the evening consisted of open discussion, with comments delivered by members of STOP (Stop Transmission Lines Over People), representatives of Aurora Ratepayers Associations, and then concerned residents. Ms. Jennifer Cooper, representative of STOP - Aurora Branch and Sue Fusco, STOP- Markham Branch reaffirmed STOP's position that the public's questions need to be addressed by Hydro One officials before any decisions are made. Ms. Cooper stated there are three major areas of concern regarding the plans proposed by Hydro One: communications, health, and financial issues. She stated members of the community have been disappointed by the lack of communication from Hydro One. Increased communication to community residents about this proposal is critical and she asked: How will public meetings be promoted to residents? How will residents be provided with up-to-date information throughout the process on the status of this study and future plans? Has a reputable independent market research company been hired to conduct a survey to 2 -79- COUNCIL - JULY 13, 2004 determine public opinion regarding this plan and to statistically validate the financial, health and personal concerns of residents? With respect to health concerns, Ms. Cooper also stated that numerous studies have been conducted internationally over the past 15-20 years that link electric and magnetic fields (EMFs) to childhood leukemia, and she stated that a California law is in effect requiring that new schools be built at least 150 feet from power lines. She posed the following questions to Hydro One: • When Hydro One conducts its environmental study, will the potential impact on residents be considered in their final recommendation? • What measure of EMF exposure does Hydro One deem to be acceptable? • Will every concerned resident be able to obtain EMF readings before and after the installation of any service? Ms. Cooper said that many residents in the community purchased their homes based on the understanding that the power line in their backyards would be buried, removed, or never expanded. Local residents are now concerned that their property values would decrease significantly if taller towers were installed. Ms. Cooper posed a number of questions to Hydro One, including: Will Hydro One conduct an exhaustive independent appraisal of the impact on local residents' real estate values and factor this into the final decision? Has Hydro One considered alternate plans such as burying the lines to reduce loss of property value to residents in our communities? Will financial compensation be offered to residents to offset the equity lost due to the installation of the proposed new towers? Will a detailed and exhaustive study be conducted to explore alternative routes that do not negatively affect residential communities? What are the implications if the decision regarding the Installation of the new power line is delayed? What are Hydro One's future plans for Aurora? Finally, Ms. Cooper stated the residents appreciate the role of the Town of Aurora Council, and trust Council will act in the best interests of the community. She asked: • What is the position of Aurora Council regarding the proposed Hydro One plan and what actions has it taken to date concerning this matter? • Does Mayor Jones feel that he has a conflict of interest regarding this plan, given his position on the Aurora Hydro Board of Directors? • Given Markham Council's unanimous opposition to high voltage transmission lines running through residential communities, will Aurora Council support community residents and also vote unanimously to prevent high voltage transmission lines running through our backyards? Three ratepayer representatives addressed the audience: Ms. Susan Walmer of R.A.Y.S.S. (Ratepayers of Aurora Yonge Street South); Mr. Ben Kestein, representing P.A.R.K.S. (People Against Restructuring Known Sanctuaries) and New Deal Ratepayers' Association; and Mr. Jim Morrison of the Bayview Wellington Ratepayers Association. These ratepayers' associations questioned: whether there were guidelines for avoiding urban areas or environmental areas, when erecting new towers and hydro lines; , if it costs more to put lines underground, does the community pay the additional cost? if the "doing nothing" alternative had been considered, in light of emerging alternative energy sources in the near future. They also stated that increased communication between all parties is necessary. am COUNCIL - JULY 13, 2004 Additional issues were introduced by other local residents including the following: • excessive development in York Region, which is the main problem for which the community has accountability, not Hydro One. This rapid growth has created the need for additional electric supply; • the height of the proposed towers, if the right-of-way through Aurora is selected as the preferred alternative. The proposed towers are seen as incompatible with the community and aesthetically unpleasant; the ratio between tower height and width of the right-of-way; the potential for towers to be knocked down, as a result of vandalism or in severe weather, such as the 1998 ice storm; again, whether Hydro One would consider burying the power lines underground. Residents wanted further details on this issue. Other residents asked if Ontario Power Generation was considering construction of a new source of electricity. A number of residents who live adjacent to the existing hydro towers stated they were told these hydro lines would be buried or removed altogether. In one case, a resident claimed to have verified this with the town planning staff, who confirmed what the developers had told him. This resident phoned Hydro One, and stated he was also told the hydro lines would either be buried or taken out altogether. Another participant stated that Mayor Jones also confirmed this. The question, 'why put hydro lines near where people live? was asked repeatedly by the participants. Financial issues, particularly property values, were noted as a major concern, although many cited health issues as their primary concern. Some were concerned that 10 years from now Hydro One would say they made a mistake with this project. This stems largely from the overwhelming concern residents have that EMFs may be linked to cancer, including childhood leukemia. A member of STOP informed the audience of her opinion that children would be exposed to EMF levels of 12-15 mG if the new lines were installed, and further stated that exposure of 4 mG doubles the risk of childhood leukemia. One resident with three small children stated her concerns because her family has a history of leukemia. Although the cause of leukemia is unknown, with additional electric power, there is increased concern about potential risks to children's health. Another participant who lives in a house that backs onto the existing transmission corridor said she was diagnosed with cancer last year. She realizes that there is no proof that EMFs cause cancer, but feels strongly that no additional risk should be taken. The audience echoed this position, and stated that Hydro One has a cavalier attitude regarding the issue of potential health concerns. On behalf of Hydro One, responses were provided by Roger Glass, Farooq Qureshy, Gary Schneider and Mike Sheehan to address the range of issues raised by participants. In terms of health impacts, Hydro One depends on independent experts to relay information on EMFs and potential links to health issues. Health Canada and the World Health Organization (WHO) provide this information. Health Canada's position is that a causal link has not been established between EMFs and childhood leukemia. Hydro One noted that measurements have been taken at various locations and models used to predict future magnetic fields. If transmission lines are buried 6-12 feet underground, the magnetic fields will be reduced at the edges of the ROW compared with overhead lines, but will be higher on the ROW immediately above the buried lines. W--M COUNCIL - JULY 13, 2004 Hydro One referred to other electricity supply options. Hydro One transmits power to the local utilities; it does not build or operate generating stations as an alternative to transmission lines. This is the job of Ontario Power Generation and other generators. Another alternative to transmission lines would be for local utilities to site their new stations close to Hydro One's existing high -voltage lines and run long distribution lines to serve their growing communities. Energy conservation could also contribute to deferring the need for new supply, as could a moratorium or reduction in the pace of growth in York Region. At current growth rates, demand will begin to outstrip the capacity of the current transmission circuits during the winter of 2006/2007, which could have an impact on the reliability of electrical supply to local residents. Growth forecasts for population and electricity demand are provided by local utilities such as Aurora Hydro and Newmarket Hydro who consult with their respective municipal and regional planning staff. The forecasts for areas supplied by municipal electric utilities are not projected by Hydro One. ' Hydro One stated that to accommodate growth in the northern part of York Region, a new transmission line is required, as well as a new transformer station in the Aurora / Newmarket area. Transmission corridors are sited to ensure, for safety reasons, that there is physical clearance from the wire to the edge of right-of-way. Right-of-way widths typically range from 100 — 150 feet, making the distance from the wires to edge of right-of-way approximately 50 75 feet. Hydro One's policy is to build overhead transmission lines when it is technically possible to do so. The cost of building underground is 5 to 7 times greater than the cost of building overhead. There are instances when it is not possible to build overhead, for example around some bridges, and in Toronto's downtown core where there Is no space for overhead wires. Cost is a major factor, although it is recognized that there are many other factors. Hydro One does not necessarily pick the lowest cost option. If communities don't want the transmission lines, that's still an option, but it will carry certain risks if other supply alternatives, conservation and/or limits on growth are not put in place. Closing Remarks Deputy Mayor Morris noted that the Town of Markham has taken a position strongly opposed to this, creating a task force. Aurora can now put this matter on the Council Agenda. She noted that the Town has asked Aurora Hydro to host a public information meeting on June 29, 2004. She asked ratepayers to form a coalition and encouraged the public to submit names and get involved. Deputy Mayor Morris then introduced Frank Scarpitti, Deputy Mayor of Markham who outlined the resolution passed by the Town of Markham's Development Services Committee on June 1. He said that Markham residents will not have to fight alone. He invited residents to attend the June 16 meeting of the Planning Committee at the Regional Municipality of York, which he chairs, as the Hydro transmission line study is on the agenda. Deputy Mayor Morris thanked everyone for attending and said she hoped participants found the meeting worthwhile. The meeting was adjourned at 9:45 p.m. 5 IMA COUNCIL - JULY 13, 2004 hydroI one Electric and Magnetic Fields (EMF) Workshop Hosted hy.• Hydro One Networks Hilton Suites'— Violet Room 8500 Warden Avenue, Markham Wednesday, June 16, 2004, 7:30 PM 7:30 p.m. Welcome & Introductions — Peter Gregg, Vice President, Corporate Communications, Hydro One Inc. • Objectives for session 7:35 p.m. Overview of Workshop — Dave Hardy, Hardy Stevenson and Associates • Review agenda • Establish ground rules • Introduce presenters and those in audience available to respond to questions 7:40 p.m. EMF General background - Dr Jack Sahl, J Sahl and Associates, Director, Environment and Safety, Southern California Edison • What are EMFs7 Common sources • Physical interactions with body • International guidelines and standards for exposure (ICNIRP/IEEE C95.6) • Q&A 8:00 P.M. Existing and predicted future magnetic field levels - Dr. Jack Sahll Dr. Roger Glass, Hydro One Networks • Q&A 8:20 p.m. BREAK ff.= COUNCIL — JULY 13, 2004 hydrone 8:25 p.m. Health Effects Studies - Dr. Jack Sahl • Epidemiology, animal studies, cell studies • Results of recent national and international reviews (NIEHS, IARC, NRPB, CDHS) • Q&A 8:40 p.m. Biological Effects and Electromagnetic Fields — Dr. Magda Havas, Associate Professor of Environmental and Resource Studies, Trent University • Biological/health effects of residential/occupational exposure to electromagnetic fields 8:50 p.m. Childhood Leukemia — Dr. Mark Greenberg, Medical Director, Pediatric Oncology Group of Ontario/Senior Oncologist, Hospital for Sick Children • What is leukemia? • How is it caused? • Incidence/trends in Ontario 8:55 p.m. General Discussion 9:25 p.m. Next steps — Dave Hardy 9:30 p.m. Closing Remarks — Peter Gregg Im COUNCIL — JULY 13, 2004 Presented at Hydro One Workshop on EMFs, Markham, Ontario, June 16, 2004 Electromagnetic Fields and Cancers: Children at risk with residential and school exposure to EMFs. Dr. Magda Havas, Trent University, Peterborough, Canada, mhavas trentu.ca Abstract We now have more than 20 years of scientific research from around the world showing adverse health effects associated with exposure to electromagnetic fields (EMFs) from our use of electricity. Both children and adults are affected although children appear to be more sensitive. The epidemiological studies from Wertheimer and Leeper (1979) to the most recent met -analyses dealing with childhood leukemia and residential exposure to EMFs will be presented. There is a consistent 2- to 4-fold increased risk of children developing leukemia when they are exposed to magnetic fields exceeding 2 to 4 milli Gauss (mG) in their home. The bedroom seems to be the most critical environment and children under the age of 6 are particularly vulnerable. Evidence of a dose/response relationship, commonly used in chemical toxicology, is evident. Studies of occupational exposure to electromagnetic fields report an increased incidence of adult leukemia, brain tumors, and breast cancer at levels at or above 2 mG, and an increased risk of miscarriages above 16 mG. These studies, in combination with laboratory studies, lend credence to the concept that extremely low frequency electromagnetic fields are harmful to human health at levels to which we are currently exposed in the home, at school, and in the workplace. Buffer zones around high voltage power lines are needed to minimize human exposure. Magnetic fields at the edge of a transmission line right-of-way should not exceed 2 mG during peak power consumption. Also, mitigation should be in place to minimize ground currents. Canada's current federal guideline for extremely low frequency (ELF) magnetic fields (1000 mG during a 24-hr period) is inadequate to protect public health. Conclusions 1. Magnetic fields (extremely low frequency): "possible carcinogen" (World Health Organization) 2. 24 mG threshold level associated with childhood leukemia (home) 3. Other cancers (nervous system tumors & lymphomas) possible 4. Younger children at greater risk than older children 5. Night-time exposure important 6. Parental exposure to EMFs may be important 7. School environment contributes to daily exposure 8. Guidelines inadequate to protect publicbealth: range 2-3 mG (Sweden) to 1000 mG (Canada) 9. Prudent avoidance: establish buffer zones around high voltage power lines that do not exceed 2 mG during peak energy use. 10. Minimize ground currents associated with power delivery. Ma i 6ffiC9anada -MtTo jr jealtl7 oE�lectric and Magnetic Fields at Extremely Low Frequet... Page 1 of 4 eyeHealth Sant§ Canada Canada Canada Health Canada Rome Electric and Magnetic Fields at Extremely Low Frequencies About IYH The Issue Diseases Environment There are concerns that daily exposure to electric and magnetic fields (EMFs) . Aircraft Noise may cause health problems. These concerns are reflected in a number of . Arsenic in Drinking reports that have attempted to link EMF exposure to a variety of health issues, Water including childhood cancer. F Asbestos • CEPA Background r An Overview Biotechnology Electricity plays a central role in. modern society. It is used to light homes, ` Products prepare food, run computers and operate other household appliances, such as New Substances TVs and radios. in Canada, appliances that plug into a wall socket use electric power that flows back and forth at a frequency of 60 cycles per second (60 Chlorination --..__... hertz). > Dioxins and Furans a Disposal of.Medication Every time you use electricity and electrical appliances, you are exposed to Electric and Magnetic electric and magnetic fields (EMFs) at extremely low frequencies (ELF). The Fields term "extremely low" is used to describe any frequency below 300 hertz. EMFs Fluorides produced by the transmission and use of electricity belong to this category. " Healthy Lawns Indoor Air Quality Electric and Magnetic Fields (EMFs) > Lead Leisure Noise Electric and magnetic fields are Invisible forces that surround electrical manmade -Vitreous equipment, power cords, and wires that carry electricity, including outdoor Fibres power lines. You cannot see or feel EMFs. Occupational Expawre.to.Radiation Road Traffic and Air Electric Fields: These are formed whenever a wire is plugged into an outlet, F Pollution even when the appliance is not turned on. The higher the voltage, the stronger F PCBs the electric field. Radon Magnetic Fields: These are formed when electric current is flowing within a . Smog device or wire. The greater the current, the stronger the magnetic field. ultraviolet Rad_ iation ". Vermiculite Insulation containing Asbestos Electric and magnetic fields can occur separately or together. For example, vitamin Ds and when you plug the power cord for a lamp into a wall socket, it creates an Sunlight electric field along the cord. When ybu turn the lamp on, the flow of current wood smoke through the cord creates a magnetic field. Meanwhile, the electric field is still Food present. Lifestyles The Strength of EMFs Medical Products Electric and magnetic fields are strongest when close to their source. As you move away from the source, the strength of the fields fades rapidly. This Complete list means you are exposed to stronger electric and magnetic fields when standing Subscribe close to a source (e.g., right beside a transformer box or under a high voltage http://www.hc-sc.gc.adengiish/iyh/cnvironmer tlfns gnvtic.htmI 6/ 15/2004 Health Canada - It's Your Health - Electric and Magnetic Fields at Extremely Low Frequei... Page 2 of 4 COUNCIL - JULY 13, 2004 Sign up as a distributor power line), and you are exposed to weaker fields as you move away. When you are indoors at home, the magnetic fields from high voltage power lines and transformer boxes are very weak when compared to the fields from electrical household appliances. Typical Canadian Exposures to EMFs at ELF On a daily basis, most Canadians are exposed to EMFs generated by household wiring, fluorescent lighting, and any electrical appliance that plugs into the wall, including hair dryers, vacuum cleaners and toasters. In the workplace, common sources include video display terminals (computer monitors), air purifiers, photocopiers, fax machines, fluorescent lights, electric heaters and electric tools in machine shops, such as drills, power saws, lathes and welding machines. Typical Exposures Present'No Known Health Risks Research has shown that EMFs from electrical devices and power lines can induce weak electric currents to flow through the human body. However, these currents are much smaller than those produced naturally by your brain, nerves and heart, and are not associated with any known health risks. There have been many studies about the effects of exposure to electric and magnetic fields at extremely low frequencies. Scientists at Health Canada are aware that some studies have suggested a possible link between exposure to ELF fields and certain types of childhood cancer. However, when all of the studies are evaluated, the evidence appears to be very weak. After a recent evaluation of the scientific data, the International Agency for Research on Cancer classified ELF magnetic fields as "possibly carcinogenic" to humans based on studies of childhood cancer. However, the evidence is not strong enough to conclude that EMFs definitely cause cancer in children. More studies are needed to draw firm conclusions. Concerns about Electromagnetic Interference At typical exposure levels, EMFs may cause interference with electronic devices. For example, office workers may notice image movement (jitter) on their computer screens if the computer is in an area where magnetic fields are slightly above typical levels found in offices. Some sources that generate these slightly elevated levels are the cables that bring electrical power into an office area, and common electrical equipment, such as power transformers. Magnetic fields that cause jitter on computer screens are well below the levels that would cause human health effects. To solve the jitter problem, simply move the computer to another part of the room where the magnetic fields are weaker. Minimizing Your Risk You do not need to take action regarding typical daily exposures to electric and magnetic fields at extremely low frequencies. There is no conclusive evidence of any harm caused by exposures at levels normally found in Canadian living and working environments. Health Canada's Role Health Canada, along with the World Health Organization, monitors scientific research on EMFs and human health as part of its mission to help Canadians http://www.hc-sc.gc.c,Jcnglish/iyh/en vironment7A7gnetie,html 6/15/2004 H8%92nada JIt LYo 1r3Hea20041ectric and Magnetic Fields at Extremely Low Frequet... Page 3 of 4 maintain and improve their health. At present, there are no Canadian government guidelines for exposure to EMFs at ELF. Health Canada does not consider guidelines necessary because the scientific evidence is not strong enough to conclude that typical exposures cause health problems. Some national and international organizations have issued exposure guidelines for EMFs at ELF. However, these guidelines are not based on a consideration of risks related to cancer or other health problems. Rather, the point of the guidelines is to make sure that the electric currents in the body caused by exposure to EMFs are not stronger than the ones produced naturally by the brain, nerves and heart. For the most part, typical EMF exposures in Canadian homes, offices and other work sites, are far below these guidelines. Need More Info? For further information contact: The Consumer and Clinical Radiation Protection Bureau Health Canada 775 Brookfield Road Ottawa, Ontario K1A 1C1 Telephone: (613) 954-6699 Fax: (613) 952-7584 E-mail: CCRPB-PCRPCCQhc-sc.gc.ca Also, see the following Fact Sheets on the World Health Organization (WHO) Web site: • Electromagnetic Fields and Public Health: Extremely Low Frequency(ELF) 4x1 • Electrorn�netic Fie_ldsand Public Health: _e Extremely Low Frequency Fields snd Cancer wn And visit these Web sites: The International Agency for Research on Cancer (]ARC), Static anal extremely low -frequency (ELF) electric and magnetic fields. Report No. 80 41 The U.S. National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences (NIEHS), Questions —an dAnswers about EMF w� Also, see: It's Your Health, Safes of Exposure to„Electric and Magnetic Fields from Computer Monitors and Other Video Display Terminals For additional articles go to the It's_Your Health Web site You can also call (613) 957-2991 Updated: April 2004 Original: December 2001 ©Her Majesty the Queen in Right of Canada, represented by the Minister of Health, 2004 ISBN # H50-3/101-2004E-HTML Catalogue # 0-662-36884-3 http://www.hc-sc.gc.ar/english/iyh/environment/tri gnetic.html 6/15/2004 Health Canada - It's Your Health -Electric and Magnetic Fields at Extremely Low Frequei... Page 4 of 4 COUNCIL - JULY 13, 2004 • Also available in 0 version Last Updated: 2004.04-29 © Important Notices hitp://www.hc-sc.gc.ca/english/iyh/environmenth&*netie.html 6/15/2004 Ityd eLNetworatyl,1Y?ur�dfnunity-New Projects Page I of 3 f /h*AUkkWM on@ Networks Home > In Your community > New Projects > Transmission System Projects Uattrmaaln$afetyy In Your CIJ3 bounty F ero FMciency Tips and loos New projects a3cr0a1tifflStj-atomps and Transmision System Projects Supply to York Region - Transmission Line Project Frequently Asked Questions D What is the need for this project? I Regulatory Affairs j m What other alternatives did you consider? Media Centre E m Will each of the alternative routes on existing transmission - - -i corridors fit within the land available? * What is the Impact of doing nothing? * What are Electric and Magnetic Fields (EMF)? * Will the new transmission facilities affect the Oak Ridaes Moraine? n How long will it take to construct this project? • Can something be done to make the transmission line look better? v How can I find out about Public Information Centres? What is the need for this project? Based on load forecasts provided by the local electric utilities, York Region is one of the fastest growing areas of the province. The utilities in Markham, Richmond Hill, Vaughan, Aurora and Newmarket together with Hydro One identified the need for additional transmissloq facilities to supply increased load. The need for additional transmission facilities is also supported by the Independent Electricity Market Operator, as confirmed in their annual 10 Year Outlook. back to top What other alternatives did you consider? A wide range of transmission options were considered. The two options that 7/9/2004 ffl Il,y6WiVgwogt ylnl our i66t#nunity -New Projects Page 2 of 3 were examined in greater detail were options that used existing transmission corridors. The use of existing corridors minimizes the Impact on the residents, the environment, businesses and community facilities. Other routes are being assessed, Including those Identified by the local communities and other stakeholders. Hydro One will also support the development of non -transmission solutions (e.g. distributed generation or conservation) than can meet the identified need for electrical power in a reasonable time frame. back to top Will each of the alternative routes on existing transmission corridors fit within the land available? Yes. The proposed transmission reinforcements along either transmission corridor can fit on the existing land designated for electrical transmission. back to ton What is the impact of doing nothing? York Region is one of the fastest growing areas of the province, based on load forecasts provided by the local electric utilities. The proposed new transmission facilities will meet the needs for electrical supply In York Region for the forseeable future. The consequences of doing nothing Include: - less reliable power supply to York Region; - emergency appeals for conservation during peak electrical consumption periods; - Increased risk of blackouts to customers in York Region. back to top What are Electric and Magnetic Fields (EMF)? EMF are Invisible fields found everywhere electricity is used, from toasters to computers to electric power facilities. Health agencies and independent scientific groups have studied potential health risks from EMF exposure for more than 30 years and research continues on a range of questions. To date, a health hazard has not been established. Health Canada has assessed these studies and concludes: "Typical exposures present no known health risks." Hydro One understands that this issue is of concern to some residents and will make every effort to ensure that information Is made available through workshops, public information centres and at the Hydro One Web site. back to too Will the new transmission facilities affect the Oak Ridges Moraine? Hydro One's approach to siting transmission lines is to make best use of existing transmission corridors to minimize environmental and community Impacts. Our proposed route options cross the Oak Ridges Moraine, but use existing corridors and do not require any additional lands on the Moraine. Hydro One will work closely with Oak Ridges Moraine stakeholders to ensure that their concerns are addressed at the planning and construction phases, and any effects mitigated. 7/9/2004 —91— Jftf iLN Iwgr( E ylrxlY3our JUBWx pity - New Projects Page 3 of 3 back to ton How long will it take to construct this project? It is expected to take 1.5 to two years to construct the project. We have an in- service goal for the new facilities of late 2006. back to too Can something be done to make the transmission line look better? The aesthetics of transmission line structures is a subjective matter. There are design options including traditional lattice towers and steel poles. Landscaping around facilities Including berms, walls and vegetation is common. Hydro One will work closely the local community and Municipal Planning Departments to conform with local development standards. back to too How can I find out about Public Information Centres? Hydro One advertises in regional and local newspapers well in advance. We also distribute notices with the public information centres' details to homes and businesses in the local area. More than 24,000 notices were delivered for the Initial public information centres. If you'd like to be notified, please contact coi,nmijnitv.relatioiis@HydroOrie.com back to top Still have questions? We're updating our FAQ section regularly In response to your questions. If you'd like to submit a question, or would like to be notified when we've added new information to our site, please contact: Carrie -Lynn Ognibene Community Relations Hydro One Networks Inc. Phone; (416) 345-5130 E-mail: community relations@hydroone com [ Printable Version j All contents © 2004 Hydro One Networks Inc. All rights reserved. Privacy and Terms of Use 7/9/2004 —92— t6 '04JA.6:J1 F@'TOt�dblb OF KING 905 833 2300 70 9057264736 P.01/06 ULL 1158 ZZU 44 , ATTACHMENT 4 TOWNSHIP OF DING COMO HTTEE OF THE WHOLE REPORT The following item from the Committee of the Whole Report of May 3`0, 2004 was adopted by Council at its meeting of the same date. C,O.W.02004-131 DEPUTATIO DOROTHY =ARD, 14615 WESTON ROAD PlanningDepartment Report No. P-2004-16 re, Hydro One Transmission Litre Project Dorothy I=d expressed concern that the Public Notice advising ofthe Public Information Meeting to be held on Wednesday, May 5s', 2004 was not made available in sufficient time for residents to attend and requested that the Committee ask Hydro One to reschedule the =eting. Committee recommends that the deputation made by Dorothy Izzard be received. PLANNING DEPARTMENT REPORT NO. P-2004.16 R: HYDRO ONE TRANIM[SSION LINE PROJECT Committee considered Planning Department Report No, P-2004-16 advising Committee and Council with respect to a need for and proposal to expand the existing transmission facilities to provide additional electricity to northern York Region and establish a corporate position with respect to the alternative routes, Committee reconunends that the Planning Department Report No. P-2004-16 be received and that the recommendations therein be approved, as amended, as follows: A. That Planning ReportNo. P-2004-16 be received as information and forwarded to Hydro One, 8. That the Township of King advise Hydro One that the Township supports Alternative 1 as the preferred transmission line; C. That the Township include Notice of the Public Information Centres on the Township Website; D. That Township staff continue to monitor the process and report back to Council as necessary; and E. That the Township of King advise Hydro One that the Township opposes Alternative 2 based on environmental concerns, impacts on adjoining lands, additional substantial costs to Ontario Taxpayers, the line is not for servicing King Township, the benefiting municipalities should host it. f 7V 705- - 7�6 =s 73d T- E PLANNING DEPAPi WNT RECEIVED JUL 0 6 2004 INITIALS ACTION COU4dW e6 '04J fi-- l I TOWNff OF KING 905 833 2300 TO 9057264736 P.02i06 TOWNSHIP OF KING IIAU, May 3, 2004 TO: Committee of the Whole FROM: planning Department SUBSECT: Planning Report No. P-2004-16 14ydro One Transmission into Project I. RECOMMENDATIONS The Planning Department respectfully submits the following recommendations: A. That Planning Report No. P-2004-16 be received as information and forwarded to Hydro One, B. That the Township of Ding advise Hydro One that the Township supports Alternative l as the preferred transmission line. C. That the Township include Notice of the Public Information Centres on the Township W ebsite. D. Township staff continue to monitor the process and report back to Council as necessary. 2. PT RPOSE The propose of this report is to advise Committee and Council with respect to a need for and proposal to expand the existing transmission facilities to provide additional electricity to northern York Region and establish a corporate position with respect to the alternative routes. 3. BACK._„ G120>J1�17 The existing transmission lines and facilities delivering electricity to northern York Region are expected to reach capacity by the winter of 2005/6_ In addition, the proposed line would benefit Markham, Vaughan and Richmond Hill by addressing the supply capacity. The loss of either one of the current supply lines could severely impact a wide area within each of the three municipalities. Hydro One has proposed to address the identified need through the construction of a 230kV double circuit transmission line utilizing one of the following alternative routes: o Alternative 1 — rebuild Hydro Ono's existing transmission line between the Parkway Transformer Station in Markham to Armitage Transformer Station at the south end of Newmarket. o Alternative 2 — rebuild Hydro One's existing transmission line between Clairville Transformer Station in Vaughan (Woodbridge) to Armitage Transformer Station at the south end of Newmarket. Both of the above noted alternatives would replace an existing line on the corridor. —94— CoUel e6 _04J16-�1 f§,TOWN UT OF KING 905 833 2300 TO 9057264736 P.03i06 PLANNING REPORT NO. k-2004-16 PAGE 2 The need for the project has been established by the various York Region utilities and hydro One through a joint planning study completed in July 20(3. The above noted transmission line is subject to both an Environmental Assessment approval and Ontario Energy Board approval. The proposed line is intended to be in service by late 2006, subject to receiving all approvals and obtaining the necessary easement rights. 4. DISCUSSION The two alternative routes are shown on Appendix W. Alternative 1 is a 24 km line on an existing transmission corridor. The transmission line would travel through Markham, Whitchurch-Stouffville, Richmond Bill, and Aurora to the south end of Newmarket. The current line is 115kV and would require rebuilding the transmission line on the existing corridor to provide a 230kV double circuit line. Alternative 2 is an approximately 44 km line also on an existing corridor. The transmission line would travel through Vaughan and King Township before making its way into Newmarket. The current line is a 230kV line and would require a new 44km 230 kV double circuit line to be constructed adjacent to the existing 230 kV circuits. A review of the material provided to date suggests that the improvements would result in some benefit to the rural area surrounding Newmarket and Aurora, although no specifics are provided. The need appears to be necessary to respond to capacity limits due to significant growth throughout York Region from 1997 to 2002 and anticipated future growth. At this early stage in the process the broad based issues ran generally be categorized as follows: nearby landowner effects, environmental effects, easements, and cost. Both alternative routes pass through existing and proposed residential and commercial areas, A preliminary assessment of the two routes would suggest that Alternative 2 would appear to have a longer length of the transmission lines through existing and proposed residential and commercial areas than Alternative 1. Both alternative transmission lines would have to cross the Oak Ridges Moraine. Hydro One will have to address any effects of the project on the environment. A preliminary review indicates that Alternative 2 traverses a much broader extent of the Oak Ridges Moraine and generally more sensitive lands. It is not clear to Township staff at this point as to the extent to which each of the existing transmission corridors are owned by Hydro One or located within easements. It will be necessary for Hydro One to assess the existing rights and need for new easement agreements. Given the varying length of the two alternative routes, it can be expected that Alternative 1 will involve fewer properties and property owners. Similarly, it is anticipated that Alternative I will be significantly less expensive to build than Altemative due to its significantly shorter length. As previously noted, the proposed transmission line is subject to both an Environmental Assessment approval and Ontario Energy Board approval. The proposed line is intended to be —95— C 0 U �tl @6 ' 04j OIL V2 f5, TOMB if OF K I NG 905 833 2303 TO 9057264736 P. 04i06 PLANNING REPORT NO, P-2004-16 PAGE 3 in service by late 2006, subject to receiving all approvals and obtaining the necessary easement rights. The following table illustrates the Schedule proposed by Hydro One. Several Public Information Centres (PIC) are scheduled .tor late April and early May. Details of the location and times are shown on Appendix `B'. One of the PIC's is scheduled to take place in the Township on May 5, 2004 at the Kettleby-Pottageville Lions Community Hall. It is include notice oFth recommended that the Township e May 5th PIC on the Township Website. 5. FINANCIAL CONSID RATIONS None at this time. 6. CONCLUSIONS The existing Hydro One transmission facilities to Newmarket and surrounding area are reportedly expecting to reach capacity by the winter of 2005/6. fIydro One is proposing to address this need through the construction of a transmission line within one of two alternative existing transmission corridors. Based on a preliminary assessment it would appear that Alternative 1, through the municipalities of Markham, Whitchurch-Stouffville, Richmond Bill, Aurora and Newmarket would have the least impact on existing and proposed residential and commercial lands, least impact on the Oak Ridges Moraine, require fewer easements and is shorter and less costly to construct. Based on the above information, it is recommended that the Township of King advise Hydro One that Alternative l is in the opinion of the Township, the preferred route. ATTACIIM'ENTS Appendix A — Alternative Routes Appendix B — Public Information Centre — Schedule Prepared and recommended by: Stephen Kitchen, 13, .S. Director of Planning Reviewed and Approved by: Bob 6asselman C A.O. ME �: ��:. _y�rR ^Ac:.b ��bb��:.»3 iiin�a�i'i1� R: N ,�l�MY�"� �d;MN�i Vl L. W V E" .... C �i "'t COUNbtLa6 "JULT 41Ff, 'MN' OF KING 905 B33 2300 TO 9057264736 P.06/06 V 0 .. Q i�-I CC3 O tj O a � o o, G? U = "n o'er U ©� I elf) I cd C4 q cd Q� � ^^r 0 C APPENDIX B ** TOTAL PAGE.06 ** C-Wb 11004 JJjL T 18 ALINING DEPT REG OF YORK 905 895 3482 P.02i05 Report No. 6 of the Planning and Economic Development Committee 4 HYDRO ONE ELECTRIC POWER SUPPLY TO YORK REGION Regional Council at its meeting on Juno 24, .2004 amended the foregoing Clause to include receipt of the following communication: 2. (c) J. D. Leach, City Clerk, City of Vaughan, June 18, 2004, forwarding a resolution regarding the Hydro One Transmission Project, adopted by the Council of the City of Vaughan at its meeting on June 14, 2004, (See Minute No. f49 of Regional Council Minutes for recorded vote.) The Planning and Economic Development Committee recommends the following: The following presentations and deputations be received: (a) Gary Schneider, Manager, Transmissions Approvals & GTA Development, and Carmine Marceilo, Director, System Development Division, Hydro One Networks Inc.; (b) Jim Baird, Commissioner of Development Services, Town of Markham; and (c) Sue Fusco, and Paul Kahnert, on behalf of STOP (Stop Transmission Lines Over People); 2. The following communications be received: (a) Shelia Birrell, Town Clerk, Town of Markham, dated June 9, 2004, regarding Hydro One Transmission Line (Parkway TS to Armitage TS) — Class Environmental Assessment Process, requesting to make a presentation to the June 16, 2004 Planning and Economic Development Committee and that York Region endorse the recommendation adopted by the Town of Markham Council on June 8, 2004. - (b) Copy of letter from Chris Somerville, Township Clerk, Township of King, to Yuri Huminilowyca, Director, Real Estate, Hydro One Networks Inc., dated May 7, 2004, regarding Hydro One Networks, Northern York Region Supply Study, Adequacy of Transmission Facilities and Transmission Supply Plan. GWhff Tl004 AN 13, kbVNING DEPT REG OF YORK 905 895 3482 P.03/05 �l U 4 Report No. 6 of the Planning and Economic Development Committee 2. The following report, June 2, 2004, from the Commissioner of planning and Development Services, be received; and 3. The following actions be undertaken by Hydro One prior to its determination of a preferred alternative: Hydro One undertake, as part of the Class Environmental Assessment Process, a fully documented identification and assessment of all possible routes and options for expanded power transmission capacity to northern York Region, including the use of other transmission corridors supplying northern York Region, the use of existing and proposed Ministry of Transportation corridors such as Highway's 404,. 400 and future 427, pursuing new corridors on rural lands, undergrounding of system, and other alternatives; 2. Hydra One, in evaluating all alternatives, give greater consideration to environmental, social and economic impacts on existing and future urban areas and established and future residential communities, Including schools adjacent to and in close proximity to the proposed transmission lines, and a lesser consideration to the factor of cost; 3. Hydro One, in considering any alternatives within existing urban areas, undertake further detailed analysis relating to: (a) The criteria set out in Section 41 of the Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Plan for the approval of an infrastructure project, such as a new or upgraded transmission line; (b) A full inventory and assessment of natural features and wildlife corridors and functions that would be potentially affected by construction activities and transmission corridor operations and relationship to adjacent urban development; (c) An assessment of the impact of the proposal on the intended use of the Hydro One transmission corridor for future trail system activity linkages within urban areas; (d) An assessment of the visual impact of the power transmission towers in an established urban environment, including an assessment of the potential ecohomic impact on homeowners and the loss of enjoyment of residential yards that are in proximity to the hydro corridors; (e) Review, with Transport Canada, the compliance of tower transmission heights with respect to Transport Canada Airport -100- CJLU,efl f04 1dli 13, UbTNING DEPT REG OF YORK 905 895 3482 P.04i05 VUIV� L JU T U4 Report No. 6 of the Planning and Economic Development Committee zoning regulations; (f) Provide information on the effects of electromagnetic fields (EMFs) on human health; disclose the relative EMF strength emanating from the proposed 230 W line; undertake a health risk assessment of the proposal in relation to adjacent urban land uses, in particular residential uses, schools and parks; and identify mitigating measures that would ensure that any proposed changes in transmission capacity will not increase the public's exposure to EMFs; 4. The Regional Chair be requested to arrange meetings with the appropriate Ministers to discuss the issues arising out of the Hydro One proposal; 51 The Regional Medical Officer of Health be requested to comment on the health issues related to EMFs; 6. A meeting be arranged with the impacted municipalities and the Region to discuss a common response to the Hydro One proposal; and 7. The Regional Clerk forward a copy of Council's resolution and all public submissions received by the Region to the Premier of Ontario, the Minister of the Environment, the Minister of Energy, the Minister of Health and Long -Term Care, the Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing, York Region MPPs, the York Region District School Board, the York Region Catholic District School Board, the Independent Electricity Market Operator and to the local municipalities. 1. RECOMMENDATIONS It is recommended that: 1. This report be received for information purposes. 2, The Regional Clerk forward a copy of this report to the area municipalities and Hydro One. 2. PURPOSE The purpose of this report is to: • Describe the project by Hydro One to build'a new transmission line to serve the growing need for electric power in York .Region, • Address the recommendation of Committee and Council to identify the impact of the project on Regional policies and communities, • Identify the next steps by hydro One to complete the project. —101— COUNCIL — JULY 13, 2004 -- THE REGIONAL MUNICIPALITY OF YORK Planning and Economic Development Committee June 16, 2004 Report of the Commissioner of Planning and Development Services HYDRO ONE ELECTRIC POWER SUPPLY TO YORK REGION RECOMMENDATIONS It is recommended that: 1. This report be received for information purposes. 2. The Regional Cleric forward a copy of this report to the area municipalities and Hydro One. PURPOSE The purpose of this report is to: • Describe the project by Hydro One to build a new transmission line to serve the growing need for electric power in York Region. • Address the recommendation of Committee and Council to identify the impact of the project on Regional policies and communities. • Identify the next steps by Hydro One to complete the project. 3. BACKGROUND On April 7, 2004 Planning and Economic Development Committee received a communication from Hydro One outlining their intention to build a new transmission line to service the growing need for electric power in York Region. At its meeting of April 22, 2004 Regional Council adopted Planning and Economic Development Committee's recommendation to "receive and refer to staff for review and comment on the implications and impact of the project on the Region's policies and on communities the transmission line will pass through." 3.1 Project Description Hydro One is proposing to build a new 230-kilovolt double circuit transmission line to increase transmission capacity and reliable electrical supply in York Region. The proposed transmission line is planned to be in service by late 2006 provided all required approvals and easements are obtained. Planning and Economic Development Committee June 16, 2004 —102— COUNCIL — JULY 13, 2004 The project is subject to approval under the Class Environmental Act and as such Hydro One will be considering at least two alternatives (see Attachment No. I for location of transmission line alternatives). Alternative one involves upgrading and replacing the existing transmission line in eastern York Region which runs from Markham to Newmarket, and the second alternative involves upgrading and replacing the existing transmission line running from Vaughan to Newmarket. Alternative one consists of a 24 km transmission line in the existing transmission corridor running from the recently approved Parkway Transformer station in Markham to the Armitage transformer station in Newmarket. The replacement transmission line will extend through the municipalities of Markham, Whitchurch-Stouffville, Richmond Hill, Aurora, and Newmarket. Alternative two consists of approximately 48 km of transmission line located within Vaughan, King Township and Newmarket. 3.1.1 Need Current electrical load forecasts by the local electric utilities in York Region indicate that capacity of the existing transmission line supplying electricity to central and northern York Region will be exceeded by the winter of 2005/06. Hydro One has indicated that if a transmission outage occurs during the winter peak period, other transmission facilities may be unable to reliably supply customers in northern York Region. The need for the facility was identified by Hydro One and the York Region electric utilities and was confirmed in the 10 year Outlook Report (2005 to 2014) by the Independent Electricity Market Operator. Upgrades to the transmission lines will strengthen the transmission system throughout York Region and allow York Region electric utilities to expand their distribution systems to keep pace with anticipated growth. Local utilities in Markham, Richmond Hill, Vaughan, Aurora, and Newmarket have signed off on a joint planning study that recommends a new transmission line. 3.2 Approvals and Consultation The proposed transmission line is subject to Environmental Assessment approval and Ontario Energy Board approval. As part of the Environmental Assessment process, Hydro One has hosted a series of Public Information Centres (PIC) to obtain stakeholder input. PICs were held on the following dates: April 28, 2004 Markham Civic Centre April 29, 2004 Newmarket Community Centre May 4, 2004 Vaughan, Woodbridge Community Centre May 5, 2004 King, Pottageville Community Centre —103— COUNCIL — J U L Y 13, 2004 Hydro One Electric Power Supply to York Region Issues raised at the PICs included the impact of electric magnetic fields in association with electric power, impact on schools and other community facilities that abut the corridor, aesthetic appearance, property values and whether the proposed transmission line should be located in the Highway 404 corridor. Hydro One staff have also met with Regional and municipal staff and local Councils to provide details of the project. Attachment No. 2 to this report lists these meeting dates. Hydro One staff have also met with the officials from the York Region Catholic School Board to begin to address issues regarding electric magnetic fields (EMF) and the proximity of schools along the route alternatives. Hydro One will continue to work with representatives of the catholic and public school boards, the schools themselves, and concerned parents on this and other project effects that are identified through the consultation process. 3.2.1 Meeting with Regional Transportation and Works Staff Hydro One is required to obtain road occupancy permits from York Region should they require the use of a Regional road to access their hydro corridor(s). Hydro One staff met with Regional Transportation Operations and Design and Construction staff on April 27, 2004 and provided an overview of their project. Regional staff will work co-operatively with Hydro One staff to ensure access by Hydro One to their hydro corridor(s) from Regional roads is carried out in a sate manner and if closures of Regional roads are required they will be done in a manner that has the least disruptive impact on traffic flow. 4. ANALYSIS This project is subject to the Environmental Assessment process and Hydro One is responsible for adhering to the process requirements and ensuring all aspects of the process are addressed to the satisfaction of the Minister of the Environment. The Regional Official Plan contains policies regarding transmission facilities. These policies are reviewed in section 4.2 and are likely to be addressed through the Environmental Assessment process. 4.1 Environmental Assessment Process The project is subject to Class Environmental Assessment for Minor Transmission Facilities, which includes all transmission line projects involving more than 2 km of line and which: i. Are capable of operating at a nominal voltage level of 1151cV. ii. Are capable of operating at a nominal voltage level higher than 115kV and less than 500kV and which involve less than 50 km of line. Planning and Economic Development Committee June 16, 2004 —104— COUNCIL — JULY 13, 2004 Figure 1 shown on page 5 sets out the general Class Environmental Assessment Process. Some of the key steps in the Environmental Assessment process include: a. Delineating the boundaries of the study area so that the area includes known potential environmental impacts and technical constraints. Environmental constraints include ecologically sensitive areas, and technical constraints may involve problems associated with construction and maintenance. Collecting and mapping environmental data including: • Agricultural resources • Appearance of the landscape • Biological resources • Forest resources • Heritage resources • Human settlement • Mineral resources recreational resources c. Identifying and evaluating alternative methods and assessing each method based on environmental, technical and cost impacts. d. Completion and filing of the Environmental Study Report with the Ministry of the Environment. Subsequent to the filing, Hydro One may have further communications with individuals whose property is affected by the undertaking. —105— COUNCIL - JULY 13, 2004 Hydro One Electric Power Supply to York Region Figure 1 Class Environmental Assessment Process Establish Need Select System Options Exemplar Individual EA Status under EA claw EA Study Area Definition. I Initial Notification I Inventory Environment Identify & Evaluate Options/ Alternatives Select Preferred Alternative & Prepare Draft Environmental Study Report Final Notification W day review (minimum) IndIVIMaI EA --Bump Up by Hydro One Individual EA Bump Upby MlnisterMinister's Review& Issue Environmental Study Report Proceed with Undertaking Planning and Economic Development Committee June 16, 2004 Apply Screening Criteria Out? 5 -106- COUNCIL - JULY 13, 2004 4.2 Regional Official Plan Hydro electric power service will be required to serve the growth forecast set out in Section 5.1 of the Regional Official Plan. 4.2.1 Section 5.1 - Growth Forecasts Hydro One's project is intended to serve primarily Aurora, Newmarket, East Gwillimbury, Georgina, and rural parts of King Township and Whitchurch-Stouffville. The project will also allow the local electric utilities in Markham, Vaughan and Richmond Hill to expand their electricity distribution systems to keep pace with continued economic growth. Improvements to Hydro One's transmission lines are required to service the 2006 population and employment and the subsequent growth. Table 1 of the Regional Official Plan provides anticipated population and employment growth for these area municipalities. Total population and employment forecasts for the six above noted area municipalities is approximately 249,000 residents and 90,000 jobs for 2006. An increase of 33,000 persons and 15,000 jobs is forecast by 2011. An extract of Table 1 is provided below. TABLE 1 1996 2006 2011 2016 Aurora Population 36,000 49,000 56,000 63,000 Employment 14,600 19,000 22,000 26,000 East Gwillimbury Population 20,400 27,000 32,000 41,000 Employment 4,600 7,000 9,000 12,000 Georgina Population 35,900 45,000 51,000 59,000 Employment 7,500 10,000 13,000 16,000 King Population 18,800 22,000 25,000 29,000 Employment 6,100 7,000 8,000 10,000 Newmarket Population 59,000 79,000 87,000 91,000 Employment 27,200 37,000 41,000 43,000 W hitch urch- Stouffville Population 20,500 27,000 31,000 35,000 Employment 7,500 10,000 12,000 14,000 Totals Population 190,600 249,000 282,000 318,000 Employment 67,500 90,000 105,000 121,000 -107- COUNCIL — J U L Y 13, 2004 Hydro One Electric Power Supply to York Region 4.2.2 Communication Corridors and Transmission Facilities Section 6.5 of the Regional Official Plan contains policies that encourage the development and maintenance of modern transmission facilities in such a way as to minimize visual impact, the impact on the environment and disruption to existing communities. Key polices related to hydro -electric power lines are noted below followed by an explanation as to how Hydro One intends to address the policies. 6.5.2 That major hydro electric power lines crossing the Region of York above or below ground be constructed, maintained and operated so as to minimize their impact on people, the adjacent uses of land and the environment, and to support the urban structure of this Plan. This may include shared rights of way in order to reduce impact on adjacent lands and resources. Both alternatives currently being considered by Hydro One are proposing a replacement transmission line within an existing hydro right-of-way that currently serves York Region. Although the EA process must confirm the environmental impact, it is anticipated that utilizing the existing rights -of -way will have the least amount of impact on the environment and existing communities. 6.5.4 That utilities be constructed according to the following criteria: a. That facilities be located so as to avoid the principal elements of the Regional and local Greenlands System and to minimize the use of agricultural lands; b. That in the future, buried cables or improved appearance steel pole; structures be used where possible in urban areas or where the visual impact would be high, provided the facilities have satisfied the requirements of the Environmental Assessment Act; c, that any odour, noise or emission from a facility be abated to the extent possible and to a level acceptable to the Region of York and/or affected area municipality; d. that soil removal in trench construction be carried out so that topsoils strata are replaced in their farther order; e. that surplus soils derived from trench excavation and construction debris be disposed of so as not to negatively impact the natural environment and in a manner acceptable to the landowner and the area municipality; f. that construction be timed to minimize crop losses; g. that the crossing of roads or usage of road right-of-way be subject to the approval of the Region and/or respective area municipalities; h. that the crossing of any lake or stream be subject to the approval of appropriate conservation authorities and the Ministry of Natural Resources; i. that plans to achieve multiple use of a right of way containing a utility be prepared and implemented subject to the approval of the Region of York and/or affected area municipality; and, j. that the damage to the natural soil or surface drainage, farm field tile beds and fencing be restored to the satisfaction of the property owner. Planning and Economic Development Committee 7 June 16, 2004 COUNCIL — JULY 13, 2004 Policies 6.5.4 a, b, c, f, and h will be addressed during the Environmental Assessment process. Hydro One is currently evaluating if and where they may be constructing steel poles as replacements to lattice towers. Polices 6.5.4 d, e, and j can be met by Hydro One following the guidelines for Construction and Maintenance referenced in the Class Environmental Assessment for Minor Transmission Facilities. 4.2.2.1 Construction and Maintenance Construction and maintenance and right -of way management activities will be carried out in accordance with the Environmental Guidelines for the Construction and Maintenance of Transmission Facilities. As part of the guidelines, specific instructions may be issued where environmentally sensitive situations are identified through the planning or construction phases. The typical mitigation measures are shown on Attachment No. 3 to this report, which identifies what the environmental concern is, what the mitigation measure is, and when it is to be applied. For example, an environmental concern would be wind and water erosion to soil, the mitigating measure would be a combination of avoiding certain areas, timing activities to the most stable ground conditions, slope stabilization, mechanical erosion control, vegetation erosion control and recompaction of trenches. The mitigating measures may be applied if access roads are needed and soil erosion presents a problem situation. 4.3 Impact on Communities Detailed assessment of the impact on urban and rural communities is also a criterion of the Environmental Assessment process. This section provides a general overview of the types of communities the proposed transmission line will pass through if the existing rights -of -way are utilized. Alternative one traversing the eastern portion of York Region will pass through: • the urban built-up portion of Markham from approximately Highway 407 to Major Mackenzie Drive, consisting of both employment areas and residential areas • new residential development under construction north of Major Mackenzie Drive, • the eastern edge of the hamlet of Victoria Square • the community of Gormley • parts of the Oak Ridges Moraine • built up urban parts of Newmarket and Aurora located between Mulock Drive and Vandorf sideroad, consisting of residential and employment areas Alternative two located in the western portion of York Region will pass through: • the urban built up area in Vaughan from Highway 407 to Major Mackenzie Drive comprised of primarily residential neighbourhoods • the eastern edge of the community of Kleinburg • rural area from Kleinburg to Newmarket —109— COUNCIL — J U L Y 13, 2004 Hydro One Electric Power Supply to York Region • hamlets of Pottageville and Kettleby • parts of the Oak Ridges Moraine • residential neighbourhoods in west Newmarket 4.3.1 Oak Ridges Moraine The existing electric transmission line corridor in eastern York Region traverses portions of the Oak Ridges Moraine that are designated "Natural Core Area", "Natural Linkage Area", "Countryside" and "Settlement Area". Prior to the approval of an infrastructure project, such as a new or upgraded transmission line, criteria set out in Section 41 of the Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Plan must be addressed. In accordance with Section 41, an applicant must demonstrate that the following criteria have been met: • The need for the project has been demonstrated and there is no reasonable alternative. • Area of construction will be kept to a minimum. • Right of way widths will be kept to a minimum. • The project will allow for wildlife movement. • The planning, design, and construction practises adopted will keep any adverse effects on the ecological integrity of the Plan Area to a minimum. • The project is located as close to the edge of the Natural Core Area as possible. Hydro One is responsible for providing the necessary documentation to address the above noted criteria and any other applicable criteria in the Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Plan during the Environmental Assessment process. 4.3.2 Electric and Magnetic Fields The affect of EMF's (Electric and Magnetic Fields) is often raised by the general public during hydro projects. In 1995 and 1998 the Regional Medical Officer of Health and the Commissioner of Planning and Development Services prepared various reports on the topic of EMFs. The reports identified potential risks associated with EMF's and concluded that the risk of health effects from exposure to EMF is relatively low when compared to other risks in every day life. Conclusions indicated .that York Region should consider "prudent avoidance" regarding EMF's, which means exercising sound judgement in practical matters, being cautious, and taking steps to control risks but at a modest cost. Reasonable actions should be taken given the absence of clearly defined scientific risk. 4.3.2.1 Information from Hydro One At its public information centres Hydro One provides a brochure on electric and magnetic fields prepared by the National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences. The brochure provides a variety of questions and answers regarding potential health effects, results of EMF related research, standards and guidelines established by national and international safety organizations and other references for EMF topics. Planning and Economic Development Committee June 16, 2004 —110— COUNCIL — JULY 13, 2004 4.4 Next Steps Hydro One is currently in the preliminary stages of working with local communities and residents regarding the project. As part of the next steps, Hydro One will be carrying out the following: i. Second Public Information Centre - Progress Report Continue to work with Stakeholders to resolve issues associated with route options ii. Anticipated Class EA and Ontario Energy Board Approvals iii. Planned start of construction iv. Planned project in-service to meet identified need June 2004 Spring 2005 Spring 2005 Fall 2006 4.5 Relationship to Vision 2026 Goal three of Vision 2026 states that "In 2026, York Region will be renowned for its advanced technology, innovative businesses, supportive business infrastructure and highly skilled workforce. " The provision of hydro -electric power to York Region is a vital component of the infrastructure required to support businesses and residents and is needed to ensure a vibrant economy throughout York Region. 5. FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS All costs associated with the project, including construction and mitigation measures, consultation meetings, and approvals will be borne by Hydro One. Hydro One has forecast that the capacity of the existing transmission line supplying electricity to northern York Region will be exceeded by the winter of 2005/2006 and if a transmission outage occurs during the winter peak period the other area transmission facilities may be unable to reliably supply customers in northern York Region, which could result in power interruptions. Power interruptions, such as the one experienced in August of 2003, significantly impact economic growth. Hydro electric power is part of the infrastructure for a healthy economy. 6. LOCAL MUNICIPAL IMPACT 10 Hydro One staff have met with staff and Council from Markham, Vaughan, Richmond Hill, Aurora, Newmarket, Whitchurch-Stouffville and King Township. Details of the —111— COUNCIL — JULY 13, 2004 Hydro One Electric Power Supply to York Region project have been provided to the extent possible at this stage. Hydro One staff have verbally indicated that further consultation meetings are anticipated with Markham residents. On May 11, 2004 Markham Council passed a resolution requesting, among other things, their staff report on the potential health impact of the Hydro One Project. On May 3, 2004 King Township recommended, among other things, that Alternative 1 (eastern alignment) be the preferred transmission line. 7. CONCLUSION Hydro One has identified a need to upgrade the hydro transmission lines that provide service to central and northern York Region by 2006. Current alternatives proposed by Hydro One involve utilizing the existing hydro rights -of -way that traverse southern and central York Region. The project is subject to the Class Environmental Assessment process for Minor Transmission Facilities and as such Hydro One will be responsible for ensuring all requirements of the EA process are adhered to, including providing adequate consultation, evaluation of alternatives, and notice. During the EA process Hydro One will also be required to demonstrate that the project complies with the policies of the Regional Official Plan and the Oak Ridges Moraine Act and Conservation Plan. The Senior Management Group has reviewed this report. Planning and Economic Development Committee June 16, 2004 11 —112— COUNCIL — JULY 13, 2004 12 Prepared by: Paul Belton M.C.I.P., R.P.P. Principal Planner Recommended by: Bryan W. Tuckey, M.C.I.P., R.P.P Commissioner of Planning and Development Services Reviewed by: Neil Garbe M.C.I.P., R.P.P. Director of Community Planning Approved for Submission: Michael R. Garrett Chief Administrative Officer June 14, 2004 PB Attachment:1. Alternative Route Locations 2. Hydro One Meetings with York Region Stakeholders 3. General Mitigation Measures —113— COUNCIL - JULY 13, 2004 Hydro One Electric Power Supply to York Region Planning and Economic Development Committee June 16, 2004 13 -114- f L �. • 't..... ARMIT Legend Hydro Lines Oek Ridges Moraine Boundary --• ALTERNATIVE _ -ALTERNATIVE 2 WEE' Urban Areas l Towns and Villas PARKWAY BELT """'"' Municipal Boundary m Roads Transformer&atlons/Junctions Pmeuuadhy: ceummlaz owmlon Plenning and Development SeMdes oepannont 0 ComIghl, The Regional Munklpamyrf YoM, Meg 2006, x' n Oennewl -115- COUNCIL — JULY 13, 2004 9ARKHAM June 9, 2004 Mr, Bob Panizza Town Clerk Town of Aurora P. O. Box 1000 1000 John West Way Aurora, On 1AG 6J1 Clerk's Department e Services Commission ioRP SERVICES DEPT. COPIES CIRCULATED TO:, Members of Council C.A.®, Directorss rjiZVON RE: HYDRO ONE TRANSMISSION LINE (PARKWAY TS TO ARAHTAGE TS) - CLASS ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT PROCESS (13.61 Dear Mr. Panizza: This will confirm that at the meeting of Council held on June 8, 2004, Clause 6 of Report No. 33, was approved as follows: .That written submissions from sue Fusco, Kathy Kan, STOP Steering Committee, Terrence Wong, Paul and Silvia Scarcello, Christine MO, Ricky Chow, Dr. Shawn Seit, Tan and Jacqueline Strong, Sherrill Burns and Michael Kusner, Ka-Hoi Hadley Wong and Lisa Lee, Raman Patel, the petition with 94 signatures in objection received on May 26, 2004, Enza Stefanovic and Paul Lim-Hing in opposition to the Hydro One Electrical Supply Proposal, be received; And that deputations by Susan Fusco, Asim Bhatti, Wanda Lee, Mary Alexandridis, Ariana Soltys, Domenica Violante, Paul KabineM Thomas Qu, Prof. Mike Kusnor, Katherine Kan, Krisha Raveendran, Carmen D'Paula, Robert Carter, Chin Wong, John Schindler, Ricky Tang, Michelle Falco, Don McNabb, Varatha Govi, Rose Larosa and Shahira Boulos in opposition to the Hydro One Electrical Supply Proposal, be received; And that the Development Services Commission report dated June 1, 2004, entitled "Preliminary Comments on the Hydro One Electrical Supply Proposal (Parkway Belt Transmission Corridor, north to northern York Region) under the Class Environmental Assessment Process", be received and endorsed; The Corporation of The Town of Markham . 101 Town Centre Boulevard, Markham, Ontario UR 9W3 Webslte: www.markham.ra -Tel 1 56.475-4744. Fax: 905.479-7771 COUNCIL — JULY 13, 2004 !WAN And that Hydro One be advised that the Council of the Town of Markham is adamantly opposed to the possible routing option under consideration in the Town of Markham, and requires that Hydro One discontinue any further consideration of the possible routing option in the Town of Markham; And that the following actions be undertaken by Hydro One prior to its determination of a preferred alternative: 1. That Hydro One undertake, as part of the Class Environmental Assessment process, a fully documented identification and assessment of all possible routes and options for expanded power transmission capacity to northern York Region, including the use of other transmission corridors supplying northern York Region, the use of existing and proposed Ministry of Transportation corridors such as Highway's 404, 400' and future 427, pursuing new corridors on rural lands, and any other viable alternatives; 2, That Hydro One, in evaluating all alternatives, give greater consideration to environmental, social and economic impacts on existing and future urban areas and established and future residential communities, including schools adjacent to and in close proximity to the proposed transmission lines, and.a lesse'i consideration to the factor of cost; 3. That Hydro One, in considering any alternatives within existing urban areas, undertake further detailed analysis relating to: a) A full inventory and assessment of natural features and wildlife corridors and functions that would be potentially affected by construction activities and transmission corridor operations and relationship to adjacent urban development; b) An assessment of the impact of the proposal on the intended use of the Hydro One transmission corridor for a future trail system activity linkages within urban areas;. . c) An assessment of the visual impact of the power transmission towers in an established urban environment, including an assessment of the potential economic impact on homeowners and the loss of enjoyment of residential yards that are in proximity to the hydro corridors; d) Review, with Transport Canada, the compliance of tower transmission heights with respect to Transport Canada Airport zoning regulations ; ......31 —117— COUNCIL — JULY 13, 2004 -3- e) Provide information bn the effects of electromagnetic fields on human health; disclose the relative EMT strength emanating from the proposed 230 kV line; undertake a health risk assessment of the proposal in relation to adjacent urban land uses, in particular residential uses, schools and parks; and, identify mitigating measures that would ensure that any proposed changes in transmission capacity will not increase the public's exposure to electromagnetic fields. And that the Town Clerk forward a copy of this report, Council's resolution, and all public submissions received by the Town of Markham, to Hydro One, and request that the Town be added to the project's contact list; And that the Town Clerk forward a copy of Council's resolution and all public submissions received by the Town of Markham, to the Premier of Ontario, the Minister of the Environment, the Minister of Energy, Markham Area MPPs Tony Wong, Frank Klees and Mario Racco, the Ontario Energy Board, the Region of York, the York Region District School Board, the York Catholic District School Board, the Minister of Health & Long -Term Care, the Independent Electricity Market Operator, the Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing, the C)erks and -Councils of the Towns of Aurora, Newmarket; Richmond Hill; King; Vadghan,'and Whitchurch-8touffville; And that the York Region Medical Officer of Health be requested to continent on the health issues related to electromagnetic fields TWO; And that Mayor D. Cousens or Deputy Mayor F. Scarpitti meet with the President of Hydro One and the Minister of Energy, the Minister of the Environment and the Minister of Health and Long -Term Care; And that the Town engage a consultant(&) to provide legal and technical expertise in support of the Town's opposition to the routing option through Markham and that staff report back on the particulars of engaging the consttltant(s); And that staff be authorized and directed, in the event that Hydro One decides to proceed with Alternative 1 routing through Markham, to request a "bump up" to an individual Environmental A"essment; And that a Task Force be formed, consisting of Mayor D. Cousens, Deputy Mayor F. Scarpitti, Regional Councillor J. Heath, Councillor D. Horchik, Councillor K. Usman, members of STOP, and Councillors and residents of the Town of Aurora; .....41 —118— COUNCIL — JULY 13, 2004 And that a "warning" clause be included in all future subdivision agreements for new subdivisions that abut Hydro One corridors or facilities in the Town of Markham; And that a copy of the report be forwarded.to the Mayor and Clerk of the Town of Aurora with the offer for Markham staff to attend and present at a Town of Aurora Council meeting; And that staff be authorized to make a similar presentation as the one given at the Town of Markham to the Region of York at its Planning Committee meeting scheduled to be held on June 16, 2004; And that the Town of Aurora and the Region of York be requested to endorse this recommendation." Yours sincerely, Sheila Birrell Town Clerk Copy to: Jim Baird, Commissioner of Development Services Alan Brown, Director of Engineering Valerie Shuttleworth, Director of Planning and Urban Design Jamie Bosomworth, Senior Project Coordinator Geoff McKnight, Manager of Strategy & Innovation Catherine Conrad, Town Solicitor Mayor Don Cousens Deputy Mayor Frank Scarpitti . Regional Councillor Jack Heath Councillor Dan Horchik Councillor Khalid Usman SB:mbp q;ifmmca and odmieuVsticeklerksklecks eaecknosylaukcuucll-jwc B-04Acc —119— COUNCIL — JULY 13, 2004 &RK,--MMCOMMITTEE REPORT TO DEVELOPMENT` SERVICES TO: Mayor and Members of Council FROM: Jim Baird, Commissioner of Development Services Alan Brown, Director of Engineering Valerie Shuttleworth, Director of Planning & Urban Design PREPARED BY: Jamie Bosomworth, Senior Project Coordinator Geoff McKnight, Manager of Strategy & Innovation DATE OF MEETING: 2004-Jun-01 SUBJECT: Preliminary Comments on the Hydro One Electrical Supply Proposal (Parkway Belt Transmission Corridor, north to northem York Region) under the Class Environmental Assessment Process RECONu. dENDATION: :.., na • That the Development Services Commission report dated June 1, 2004, entitled "Preliminary " Comments on the Hydro One Electrical Supply Proposal (Parkway Belt Transmission Corridor, north to northern York region) under the Class Environmental Assessment Process", be received; and, , . That Hydro One be advised that the Council of the Town of Markham has very serious concerns with the possible routing option under consideration in the Town of Markham, and requires that the following actions be undertaken by Hydro One prior to its determination of a prefeired alternative: 1. That Hydro One undertake, as part of the Class Environmental Assessment Process, a fully documented identification and"assessment of all possible;outes'and options for expanded power transmission capacity to northern York Region; including the;use of other transmission corridors supplying northern York Region, the use of existing and proposed Ministry of Transportation corridors such as Highway's 404,400 and future 427, pursuing new corridors on rural lands, and any other viable alternatives; 2. That Hydro One, in evaluating all alternatives, give greater consideration to environmental, social and economic impacts on existing urban areas and established residential communities, and a lesser consideration to the factor of cost; —120— COUNCIL - JULY 13, 2004 REPORT TO DEVELOPMENT SERVICES COMMITTEE 2004-Jun-01 - Page t - 3. That in the event that any further analysis of the possible routing option in the Town of Markham is required in order for this option to be "screened 'out" by Hydro One, that such analysis include, among other matters, consideration of: a) A full inventory and assessment of natural features and functions that would be potentially affected by construction activities and transmission corridor operations; ,b) An assessment of the impact of the proposal on the intended use of the Hydro One transmission corridor for a future trail system activity linkage, as part of the Greenway System identified in the Official Plan; c) An assessment of the visual impact of the power transmission towers in an established urban environment (within the residential communities of Markham Centre, Buttonville, Cachet Woods, Cachet Estates/Jennings Gate, Cathedral Community, and Victoria Square), including an assessment of the potential , economic impact on homeowners and the loss of enjoyment of residential yards that are in proximity to the hydro corridors; d) Review, with Transport Canada, the compliance of tower transmission heights with respect to Transport Canada Airport zoning regulations (existing Buttonville and future Pickering airports); ' e) Provide information on the effects of electromagnetic fields on human health; disclose the relative EW strength emanating from the existing power line compared with the proposed 230 kV line; and, identify mitigating measures that would ensure that any proposed changes in transmission capacity will not increase the public's exposure to electromagnetic fields; and That the Town'Clerk forward a copy of this report and Council's resolution to Hydro One, and request that the Town be added to the project's contact list; and That the Town Clerk advise the Premier of Ontario, the Minister of the Environment, Markham Area MPPs Tony Wong, Frank Klees and Mario Racco, the Region of York, the York Region District School Board, and the York Catholic, District School Board, of Council's concerns and comments on this matter. PURPOSE: Hydro One is undertaking a Class Environmental Assessment (EA) for a project that would expand power transmission capacity to northern York Region. One of the options under consideration for the project consists of increasing electricity transmission capacity in an existing Hydro transmission corridor in the Town of Markham as shown on Attachment #2. The purpose of this report is to provide an overview of the Hydro One proposal, explain the approval process and identify issues and concerns relating to the viability and potential impacts of the Markham option. -121- COUNCIL — JULY 13, 2004 REPORT TO DEVELOP\SENT SERVICES COMMITTEE Page 3 - 2004—Jun-01 BACKGROUND: Hydro One is an electricity transmission and distribution company (wholly owned by the Province of Ontario), transmitting up to 97% of the electricity from various generation sources to customers and local utilities in Ontario. Electrical power is transmitted across the province through high voltage transmission lines (500kV, 230kV and 115kV). Within York Region, Hydro One transmits electricity to local utilities, including Markham -Hydro. Markham Hydro then distributes the electrical power to homes and businesses in Markham. In early 2004, Hydro One published a document titled "Transmission Solutions, a Ten Year Transmission Plan for the Province of Ontario, 2004 — 2013" which outlines their plan for transmission of electricity in Ontario for the next ten years. Hydro One's background report identified the need for improved electricity delivery in York Region. A project of particular interest to the Town is the proposed establishment of a new 230kV power line that will run from the existing main lines within the Parkway Belt Transmission Corridor (which run east -west , adjacent to Highway 407 in Markham), north to northern York Region. To address this, two possible north -south routes have been identified by Hydro One — a Vaughan option (44 kilometres long) and a Markham option (24 kilometres long). Both are within existing corridors which terminate in Newmarket at the Armitage Transformer Station (see Attachment #1.— hydro One Proposed Corridors for Increased Power Transmission to North 1... Yolk`•Region).: The proposed 230.kV pw oei ,line is subject,to'ErivironinentaLAssessinent.an' . Ontario Energy Board approval. Proposed expansion of Markham corridor As shown on Attachment #2, the Markham option identified by Hydro One is an existing hydro corridor situated generally mid -block between Woodbine Avenue and Warden Avenue, running from just south of Hwy. 407 up beyond the municipal boundary. Currently, the section south of 16a' Avenue transmits power at the 230kV level,.with a 115kV line north of 161s Avenue (staff have been advised that the existing 115kV line is actually distributing 28kV). This existing transmission corridor runs through urban lands in Markham, including the Markham Centre mixed use area, and established residential communities including Buttonville, nings Gate, Cathedral Community and Victoria Square. Cachet Woods, Cachet Estates/Jen The Hydro One proposal for the section south of 16s' Avenue isto reconstruct existing towers to an upgraded style with a similar height. North of 16a' Avenue, Hydro One is proposing to increase power transmission capacity from 115kV to 230kV. This would require the use of towers that are 60 — 70 feet taller than existing structures. Two types of towers are proposed, as shown on Attachment #3. Multiple approvals are required For this project, Hydro One is required to undertake a Class Environmental Assessment (EA) for "Minor Transmission Facilities". At the completion of the EA process, Hydro One must also obtain approval from the Ontario Energy Board (OEB). In addition, they require approval from the Electricity Market Operator (IN40). Both the EA process and the OEB process provide for —122— COUNCIL — JULY 13, 2004 REPORT TO DEVELOPMENT SERVICES COMMITTEE 2004—Jun 01 - Page 4 - 4y public input. The IMO approval is more technical in nature and does not provide for public input;; Class Environmental Assessment process The Environmental Assessment Act is administered by the Ministry of Environment (MOE). It provides decision making and public input processes that must be followed before public infrastructure projects can be undertaken. The intent of the Class Environmental Assessment (EA) process is to ensure that impacts associated with the construction and operation of a project are environmentally acceptable. The flow chart (Attachment #4) lays out the steps in the process. ,1. simply stated, a Class EA involves: the identification and assessment of alternatives for the infrastructure project .' public consultation on the alternatives (the current stage of the Hydro One EA) • identification of a preferred alternative, along with mitigative measures to minimize impacts such as environmental, social, etc. • public consultation on the preferred alternative and mitigation strategy, and • reporting on the preferred alternative A Class EA is.a "self-assessment":process led by, the proponent (in this case Hydro One).. .Provided that MOE's process is properly followed and issues: identified through consultation are . adequately'addressed, the project can receive environmental approval: MOE only becomes part of the process when an individual or group opposes the project and requests.a "bump -up" to an individual EA — which would require evaluation of a broader range of options to a greater depth of study. An individual EA can be a much longer and more extensive process. Status of the Hydro One Environmental Assessment In accordance with the Class EA process, Hydro One is conducting a public consultation program. The first public information centre was held at various venues during the last week of April and the first week in May — including an April 280, meeting in the Town of Markham. Hydro One provided a set of display boards which,identified the need for the project, identified alternative routes and designs, indicated the process they would be following, and requested the public to comment on the project. Currently, Hydro One remains focused -on assessing the Vaughan and Markham alternatives, as shown on Attachment # 1. .. Future public information centres have yet to be scheduled. Hydro One advises they originally intended to hold the second session in June. However, a date has yet to be set in order to allow more time for informal consultation with members of the public, interested groups and public agencies (e.g. School Boards). Once these consultations are completed, Hydro One will present their preferred option. The public will have an opportunity to comment further at that time. Upon completion of the consultation process, Hydro One will prepare an Environmental Study Report which will be filed with the Ministry of Environment, The report will outline the project, process and outcome. Hydro One will notify all interested parties including the public, —123— COUNCIL — JULY 13, 2004 REPORT TO DEVELOPMENT SERVICES COMMITTEE -Page 5 - 2004-Jan-01 stakeholders and agencies that 30 days are available to review the report and provide comments. At this stage, any member of the public can request that MOE "bump -up" the project to an individual EA. Requests must include -written submissions outlining inadequately addressed• issues. If no.bump-up is requested within the 30 day period, Hydro One will have Ministry; of . . Environment approval to start the project. If a "bump -up" is requested, Hydro One will have an opportunity to address the requestor. ' If the issues cannot be resolved, the Minister of Environment will review the Environmental Study. Report and the reasons for the bump -up request, and make a decision. The Minister can either indicate that the objection is not warranted thereby granting environmental approval, or direct the proponent to undertake an individual EA. The outcome of an individual EA requires the approval of a third -party Consolidated Hearing Board through a public hearing Role of the Ontario Energy Board Upon the completion of the EA process, Hydro One must also acquire approval from the Ontario Energy Board (OEB). Through its process, the OEB reviews the proposed transmission project within the context of how the project may impact the price, reliability, availability and quality of electricity. To acquire this approval, Hydro One will file an application with OEB. HydvorOne will ll lanhen parties , and the general public of the application. Any party notify interested opportunity to;participateinahe0EB'sieviewprocess,whicTincTudessubmission'ofevi. . 1., ., • .... interrogation of other parties' evideiide, and a:hearing. 'Upon the completi'bri of taus process,:. OEB reviews all submissions and issues a decision, With OEB approval, Hydro One will be in a position to construct the project. The Town and Region have no approval authority in EA or OEB processes Under the current provincial legislation for Class EA and OEB processes, the Town of Markham and Region of York hold the status of commenting agencies — they are not regulatory approval agencies. Site plan approval and building permits are not required for Hydro transmission towers. Hydro One did not require warning clauses in subdivision agreements As required by the Planning Act, Hydro One is provided copies of plans and applications for new subdivisions that abut their corridors and facilities, :This provides.anopportunity for Hydro One to review and comment on the applications -comments' could include a requestthat new home ' owners be notified of the proximity of power transmission corridors, as well as the prospects of changes to the corridors in the future. Such warning clauses in agreements were required in the past by Hydro along certain sections of Hydro corridors in Markham. Staff reviewed several subdivision agreements for newer residential developments in the vicinity of the subject Hydro corridor in the Town of Markham. Hydro did request certain technical requirements relating to such matters as fencing and grading, which are addressed in the subdivision agreements. However, Hydro did not request any specific notice or warning requirements to be included in the agreements reviewed. —124— COUNCIL — JULY 13, 2004 REPORT TO DEVELOPMENT SERVICES COMMITTEE Page 6 - 2DO4—Jun-01 DISCUSSION- Staff -have reviewed the background reports prepared by Hydro One, attended the April 28' public information session, liaised with other municipalities, and consulted with experts in the power transmission industry. Based upon these reviews and consultations, we have identified several main issues and concerns that must be addressed as Hydro One proceeds under the Environmental Assessment process, namely: ensuring that all potential options are thoroughly explored; assessing the aesthetic and environmental impacts during and following construction; and, providing a scientifically sound and conclusive statement regarding the relationship between electromagnetic fields and the proposed changes to the power transmission corridor, and any possible affects on human health. Hydro One must pursue all reasonable options As noted earlier, Hydro One has focused its efforts in this Class EA process on only two options — the,V aughan and Markham alternatives. However we note that both these options run through built -'-'up urban areas, immediately adjacent to established residential communities. We recommend in the strongest of terms that Hydro One, as part of the formal EA process, -be required to consider other possible options that could involve less of an impact on urban residential communities. Other possible options identified to date for expanded power transmission capacity to northern York Region could include other existing transmission corridors supplying northern York Region (such as corridors north of Newmarket), the use of existing' and proposed NLjnistry of Transportation,corridors.such'as Highway's 404, 400 and • . future 427, pursuing new corridors on rural lands, -and any other viable alternatives: Hydro One should identify and investigate these and any other viable alternatives as part of the current Environmental Assessment process. The effects of EW remain unknown Every electronic device emits electromagnetic fields (EMF), including clock radios, cell phones, computers and power transmission lines. Concerns have been raised for several decades regarding the potential health risks associated with exposure to EMT. York Region undertook a review of the matter eight years ago, and determined that despite a remarkably large body of research, the scientific community offers contradictory and typically inconclusive results on the effects of EMT on human health. This lack of consensus is further evidenced in the efforts of the World Health Organization; .which initiated an international review of EMT effects in 1996 and has yet to release a singularly conclusive position. Members of the public living in the residential communities adjacent to the Hydro transmission corridor shown on Attachment #2 have been expressing to Hydro One, Members of Council and the School Boards serious concerns in regard to the possible health effects of the proposal, given the close proximity'of the corridor to homes, schools and parks. Possible EW impacts are a sensitive matter worthy of further review, and the proponent should be obligated to respond to the public's concerns in a meaningful manner. This would include Hydro One providing information on the effects of electromagnetic fields on human health, disclosing the relative EMT field strengths associated with 28kV, 115kV and 230 kV power —125— COUNCIL - JULY 13, 2004 REPORT.TO DEVELOPMENT SERVICES CObIl4IITTEE - 2004-Jun-01 - Page 7 - lines, and identifying mitigating measures that would ensure that any.proposed changes in transmission capacity will not increase the public's exposure to electromagnetic fields. Social and economic. impacts must be considered in the review of alternatives Power transmission towers present a visual intrusion into the urban landscape. For the section of corridor running north from 16a' Avenue, the Hydro One proposal would require the replacement of the existing towers with structures that are 60 — 70 feet taller and potentially broader as well. The introduction of larger towers can worsen the already poor aesthetic impact of transmission corridors, present a further domination of the landscape, and possibly lead to negative economic impacts on homeowners as well as loss of enjoyment of residential yards in proximity to the corridor. For these reasons, visual impact of the altematives must be considered in the EA, along with related social and economic concerns. Confirm compliance with airport zoning regulations Federal zoning regulations are in place to restrict the height of structures in the vicinity of Buttonville Airport. At the locations in proximity to flight paths, the maximum permissible height may conflict with the height of the 230kV towers proposed by Hydro One. The Markham transmission corridor is also affected by draft regulations recently issued by Transport Canada for the Pickering Airport. Although these additional height restrictions are unknown at this. time, the onus is on Hydro One to confirm that it complies with all airport zoning regulations of Transport Canada. .? Concerns exist that construction act; 'i maq have envii ot►tfi ntal impacts Maintenance of power transmission corridors typically limits the extent of significant tree growth, but varied undergrowth does emerge over time. These areas become suitable for habitat and nesting grounds for a large variety of small mammals, birds, reptiles, etc. They can also serve as vital terrestrial corridors linking core habitat areas. Construction activity associated with the erection of any new Hydro towers would degrade the habitat value of the transmission corridors. Regardless of the alternative selected, a full inventory and assessment of natural features is required, as well as a mitigation strategy to minimize the impacts of construction. Ongoing maintenance and operating impacts of an,intensified hydro corridor are. also (if concern, relating to such. matters as the increased potential for use.by Hydro One of pesticides and.. herbicides. Markham Official Plan identifies Hydro Corridors as Activity Links in Greenway System Section 2.2.2.3 of the Official Plan supports the development of a linked Greenway System to support ecological functions, provide access to natural areas and to provide continuous trails across the municipality and linking to Regional systems. System Conceptually on Appendix Map 1 GREENWAY SYSTEM of the official al Plan,is shown Section 2,2.2.12 Activity Linkages of the Official Plan provides that the "Town encourages and will work cooperatively with Ontario Hydro to gradually establish trail links on sections of the Hydro rights -of -way ...". =126- COUNCIL — JULY 13, 2004 REPORT TO DEVELOPMENT SERVICES COMMITTEE 2004-Jun701 Page 8 - The subject transmission corridor is shown as an intended "activity. linkage" on the Greenway 'System map. Hydro One should be required to prepare an assessment of the impact of the proposal on the intended use of the Hydro One transmission corridor for a future pedestrian and bicycle path linkaga, as part of the Greenway System identified in the Official Plan. FINANCIAL CONSIDERATIONS: At this point in the EA, Hydro One continues to assess the various options. Once a preferred option has been selected, staff will report back to Council with recommendations pertaining to the selection and provide information on any potential financial impacts. ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATIONS: As detailed in the discussion section of this report, construction activity associated with the project may degrade natural flora and fauna. Staff recommend that Hydro One prepare a full inventory and assessment of natural features within the corridors, as well as a mitigation strategy to minimize the impacts of construction. The impacts of the proposal on the activity linkage's/Greenway Systems policies of the Official Plan are also of concern. BUSINESS UNITS CONSULTED AND AFFECTED: All affected departments will be involved in the review of Hydro One's preferred option, once that information is released. ATTACIIMENTS:. Attachment #1 'Hydro One Proposed Corridors for Increased Power Transmission to North York Region Attachment 02 — Hydro One Proposal for Existing Markham Corridor Attachment #3 — Illustrations of Proposed Transmission Towers Attachment #4 — Class Environmental Assessment Study Process 4 Valerie Siiuttleivorth,. .C,LP.,•R.P.P, • Director of Planning & Urban Design Director of Engineering Q:L�eveloPmem�Eegine"ingVIHPOHTS2004VuneUydm aoe.doc Commissioner of Development Services —127— COUNCIL — JULY 13, 2004 Attachment #1 Hydro One Proposed Corridors for Increased Power Transmission to North.York Region . —128— COUNCIL - JULY 13, 2004 Attachment #2 v Hydro One Proposal - Existing Markham Corridor -129- COUNCIL - JULY 13, 2004 Attachment #3 Illustrations of Proposed Transmission Tower's 0 J ` m • G F � 5 a u o N Y p .n 0 mN m d = � N � mj C r 4trl N Y 0 ro N p _ N � ILf s to 'Y C O m -130- COUNCIL — JULY 13, 2004 Attachment #4 Class Environmental Assessment Study Process Exempt or Individual EA Establish Need select System Opoon(s) status Under EA Act? Class EA study Area Definition Initial Notification aa.) Apply Screening Criteria oaa Environment No Screen Out? azJ a.aa Yes 6 Evsluale .. Allemallve5.. - ... ". Alternative 6 Prepare Draft Env. Study Report ]am Final Notifirsfion a.ar 3o day review (minimum) Individual EA sump Up by OPPos ti0"' ca.x Ontario Hydro Yes Individual Fat inister Review Bump Up by Decisio ea-u Minister Proceed Issue Env, Study Report FIGURE 3-1 'Note' Refars to' Class Environmental Assessment study Process Minister of the Eavircnment —131— COUNCIL — JULY 13, 2004 May 26, 2064 Mrs. Sheila Birrell Town Clerk Town of Markham , 101 Town Centre BouAard Markham, Ontario L3R 9 W3 Dear Mrs. Birrell, MAY 7 8 2004 via email Hard copy.by registers mail RECEIVED JUN - 7 2004 TOWN OF MA91KHAM CLERKS DEPT. Regarding Electrical Supply to Northern York Region through Markham My husband and I attended the meeting of April 28, 2004 with Hydro One concerning the building of transmission dines through my neighbourhood in Markham. I am deeply concerned about the token process of stakeholder input being undertaken by Hydro One, under the guise of Environmental Assessment and about the option being presented. I myself purchased a home in this area considering it a residential area, not an industrial zone, and do not wish to see my investment decline sharply because of inappropriate actions by Hydro One.1 demand that the Town start actively opposing the plans of Hydro One to use the current distribution corridor to build a transmission corridor on land which is too small and inappropriately located for this use. I would like the Town to gain a stop work injunction against Hydro One, If possible, as quickly as possible. The following are my comments as a householder at 66 Forester Crescent, backing onto.the.Option 1 corridor., . 1.� � When pUrchasing our home in 2600, we investigated the lines behind' 66'Forestet ' and were presented with letters to residents on the street from Ontario Hydro stating that the lines were intended for distribution only and that they would not exceed 27.6 KV. We were also told from letters from Hydra One that these lines may cease to be used in the future. Real estate agents are continuing to use these letters when they discuss the lines with potential buyers. Given this consideration, we made an investment of over $500K in our home in 2000. We accepted that there had been a modest price reduction to accommodate the lines behind the home, but at no point did we anticipate high voltage transmission lines that would significantly decrease the value of our investment and our community's' market value. 2... Option 1 travels right through some of. the most expensive lnvestlnerits'in Canada — people's' homes. These homes, given the hit taken by people on other investments in recent years, are most often the primary assets that people have for their retirement. The economic impact of decreasing their value is a consideration which must be calculated into the economic costs of this project. The Town needs to be vigorous in opposing the line, given the damage to the economic value of the market areas along the corridor. . Having Option 1 travel through such a huge residential area would significantly impact housing prices along the corridor and decrease the value of the real estate market in this area. if every home in sight of the proposed towers lost 10% of its value the market value impact on people's investment would be in the —132— COUNCIL — JULY 1.3, 2004 352 millions of dollars. It would obviously also have to be accommodated in reduced property taxes for the Town. In our case, given that we back directly onto the Option 1 corridor and that the tower would entirely fill the green space in the corridor, I have grave concerns about the saleability of our home at all. People have many needs when purchasing a home and perceived childreo's safety and the need to live in a residential area (versus an industrial zone) is of primary concern. I do not believe our home could be sold. Or If it would be sold, it would be with significant price slashing. Given that we just invested $150K in landscape improvements without being informed of these significant changes, our loss would be considerable. 3. Hydro One's EA process has been tokenism at its worst. Notice perigd to the Region and to the Town and to the resident stakeholders has been inadequate and appears to be deliberately so. • It is our understanding that the Town had little understanding of the implications of Hydro One's proposals before the meeting held with residents on April 2e. Jack Heath (regional councilor) and Dan Horchik (T of M) were unable to explain to residents what the Town's stand on the issue was. • Residents were informed in the Economist and Sun of a meeting. No notices were sent to homes in our area. • Given the widely -known Chinese demographic in the area; there was no attempt to allow time for translation of the notice into Chinese so that more. residents would be aware' of the issue. • Hydro Onecame with little information to'share with•stakeholders so that we • u could be educated and engaged in the process. For example, how wide is the standard corridor for transmission lines? From what I have observed (informally) in traveling throughout Toronto, it would appear that corridors are at least 150ft wide. Since our corridor is only 40-44ft wide, the towers would encompass the entire space (making it look even more like an industrial zone). What are the standards and what deviations are they asking permission for? None of this information was forthcoming. • Gas lines have been marked already. When one utility asks another utility to indicate where its lines are, it is a pretty good signal that the decision; In Hydro One's mind has already been made. The Town can observe the marked lines along our corridor. • Since construction has already started on a 'transfer station' at Highway 407, it is unclear whether there really is an 'option' to be selected. Additionally, since dates are projected for construction, it would also appear to be little more than a political exercise. It would appear that the consultation process is a sham. This provoked many people emotionally at the meeting and breaks down trust in Hydro One. This has impacted the credibility of Hydro One and its management significantly, just when it needs to rebuild trust and credibility in the community. If Hydro One plans in the future to vamp its nuclear program it will have to do a much better job of working with the community, rather than appearing to manipulate it. Comments from Hydro One engineers focused on the fact that the Option 1 corridor was the shortest route and therefore more cost effective. Obviously their consideration of the economics of the decision did not include the impact 2 —133— COUNCIL — JULY 13, 2004 on residential home values and the tax base to the Town, only engineering costs. Hydro One has called this a reconstruction. This is new construction and semantics should not be allowed to minimize the work that must take place and the potential damage to fragile environments as w result of the new work. People were emotional at the.mesting about the risks of transmission lines to family health. Hydro One came with no information and were inarticulate in explaining the issues and educating the stakeholders. Hydro One engineers at the back of the room were overheard commenting that it didn't matter what residents were saying, the project would go through anyway. This adds to resident cynicism about whether the EA process will be a fair one or just rammed through; 4. Why is there no option 3 or 4? The business case needs to be developed for alternative rouibs, rather than the simplistic approach of selecting the route already available which, while less expensive in the short tern to Hydro, may have a very significant impact over the longer -term. Where is long-term planning in this process and how engaged is the Town's urban planning process in this? • It would appear that planning has taken place to run transmission run lines along Highway 407. This appears to be good urban planning to follow.the transportation corridor. • Why is this not being considered for the northern route? Why does the new line not follow Highway 427 or 404 which are major corridors with employment land an both; sides, not residential land? : Why is there no'northe'rn route,bbing'tonsidersd as part of,deyelopment of 9": 'line or routes further east? In this -way it would be going through farmland with little impact on people's investments. There is need to plan ahead and to place these lines where they will not be impacting residential investments. • Should the line run up Highway 427, Hydro One could sell the property In the current corridor, which is valuable residential land, and recoup some of its costs. This has been done in many parts of Toronto and Mississauga in recent years. 5. Health Impacts of high voltage transmission lines are difficult to assess. We understand how difficult it is to pinpoint health risks from electro-magnetic fields. We do know that there are health concerns when people are immediately adjacent to'the lines and that the lines can hum and interfere with the quiet enjoyment of property. Given the narrow corridor, this is will always be a concern to current and future residents. Given that Hydro One does not know the long-term impact of these lines on the community, it should be taking steps to avoid any potential risk. It is shocking then that Hydro One would consider Option 1 that runs beside a school in this neighbourhood. Long-term health impacts, if they are not known, should be avoided by running the lines through industrial or transportation corridors or farmland, not where little children will be playing. While in the short-term this is a more expensive solution, the long-term advantages carry far fewer risks. 3 —134— COUNCIL — JULY 13, 20'04 35A 6. There appears to be inconsistent treatment of transmission lines by Hydro One. All over Toronto large corridors for multiple towers are being developed while the smaller distribution lines are being removed or buried and the land developed. Townhouses are now situated on former corridors in Scarborough. Big box stores. are on redeveloped land in Mississauga. Oakville.and Wiridsor were mentioned at the meetinglbs examples as well. Option 1 appears to fly in the face of current . practices and the variances which are required to force this option through need to be challenged. While we are most concerned about our home at 66 Forester Crescent, as reflected in some of the specific comments above, we are also concerned about a residence and golf range which we own and run at 11030'Woodbine Avenue, Gormley, near Victoria Square. All of the points are relevant to the second property as well. Therefore, Option 1 is totally inappropriate for this area and consideration should be placed on an alterative that follows either a transportation corridor or farmland or employment land to be used instead of residential land. We would request the following: • That the Town engage Its legal counsel to have work on Option 1 by Hydro One immediately stopped. • That the Town independently assess the economic impact of Option 1 on market values, especially of homes backing onto the corridor and the impact of property tax losses. • That -the Town independently assess the environmental impact of 'Option •1. • That the Town independently assess the health risks of backing onto the new transmission lines especially to students at adjacent schools and families whose homes back onto the lines. • That the Town engage the Ministry of the Environment to help it ensure a fair and appropriate use of the Environmental Assessment process by Hydro One, rather than the sham process currently underway. • That the mayor and councitors,work with our stakeholder group S.T.O. P. to stop Option 1. We look forward to a response from yourself or the mayor about this critical issue to our stakeholder group S.T.O.P. (Stop Transmission Lines Over People). Kind regards Sherrill Burns 66 Forester Crescent Markham, Ontario, L6C 1 V2 905-887-8781 (work) 905-887-8783 (home) Michael Kusner 11030 Woodbine Avenue PO Box 472, Gormley, Ontario, LOH 1 GO 905-887-8783 (home) 905-887-0843 (golf range) Copies to: Sue Fusco (S,T.O.P) Jim Baird Commissioner of Development Services The Honourable Leona Dombrowsky, Minister of the Environment 4 —135— COUNCIL - JULY 13, 2004 Frank Scarpitti, Depuff'ayor Jack Heath, Regional Councillor Jim Jones, Regional Councillor Bill O'Donnell, Regional Councillor Stan Daurio, Ward 1 Councillor Erin Shapero, Ward 2 Councillor Joseph Virgilio, Ward 3 Councillor - George McKelvey, Ward 4 Councillor John Webster, Ward 5 Councillor Dan Horchik, Ward 6 Councillor Khalid Usman, Ward 7 Councillor Alex Chiu, Ward 8 Councillor 35� —1 36— 5 COUNCIL - JULY 13, 2004 357 May 26, 2004 Mrs. Leona Dombrowsky Minister of the Environment 1e Floor,135 St. Clair Avenue West Toronto, Ontario M4V 1E5 Dear Mrs. Dombrowsky, Regarding Inadequate Class EA Process by Hydro One My husband and I attended a Class EA process meeting with Hydro One on April 28, 2004 in Markham concerning the building of 230 kV transmission lines through our residential neighbourhood. We are deeply concerned that this appears to be a sham process and certainly not the processdescribed in the legislation. Since my husband is a professor emeritus in urban and regional planning, having founded the School of Urban and Regional Planning at Ryerson University, he fully understands the process and its intents and believes it is the worst case of tokenism he has observed in many years. Undoubtedly, this issue will come to your attention through a "bump -up" in the future; however, we believe that you should be aware of the Issue and the actions of Hydro One with the intent that you influence Hydro One to display'duty of fafiness' to its stakeholders and to ensure that a proper Class EA process occurs such that all risks and benefits of the initiative (not just the cost benefits to the Utility) be considered and a best approach for the Province (and not just the Utility) be selected. Background: As part of a Glass EA processs Hydro Orie has asked for input on two ridutes for - construction of anew double circuit 230kV transmission line from either the Parkway Transformer Station (Alternative 1, Markham route) or Claireville Transformer Statidh (Alternative 2, Vaughan route) to the Armitage TS in Newmarket. This is through a series of residential neighbourhoods in Markham. It has asked for input as to the choice of design of towers which would require tearing down 80' 26.7kV distribution lines and construction of 135' or 144' transmission towers. Issues and Concerns: • Inappropriate question for input and inadequate context provided: Hydro One presented two options with no context or content provided, only the explanation that Northam York Region needs power in two years. One page of summary Information was provided. No content or context information was provided to the stakeholders so that appropriate input could be provided. . • 'The question asked, ,should this transmission line be built in your backyard (Markham) or someone else's (Vaughan) was immediately rejected by the ' community. This is not the appropriate question. People are not naive enough to accept this 'us' versus 'them' kind of positioning. The question is "What is the best way to get Hydro to northern York Region?" and this is what people were interested in understanding. We believe the question to start this EA process is deliberately flawed. • Information was needed about the following in order to respond to the more important question and none of this was forthcoming. • Current transmission corridors in this area of Ontario and how Option 1 fits with overall Ontario plans • Long-range plans for transmission lines in the larger area -137- COUNCIL - JULY 13, 2004 358 Criteria for selecting a transmission line route, other than shortest and cheapest cost to Hydro One. The standards for construction of transmission line routes and the variances that would be required for running through our residential area. For example, the corridor behind our properties is'4.0.44' wide which appe29s to be far too -small to have high -voltage transmission lines running through it without significant variance from current practices. Other routes which were assessed by Hydro One such as following transportation routes (such as Highway 427 or 404) or through employment lands or farmland, rather than through residential lands. • Inadequate Preparation and information. Compounding the lack of a reasonable topic for input, the presenters appeared very unprepared and provided little information when questions were asked about benefits and risks. • People were Very emotional at the meeting, as should have been expected, when the presenters came with no information and provided no answers to basic questions about health risks. The public has a strong perception about the risks of electro-magnetic forces from high -power transmission lines to family health. Whether these are real or not, Hydro One management came with no information and were Inarticulate in explaining the issues and educating the stakeholders. Late in the meeting, under pressure, several web -sites were mentioned as points of reference, but only after residents continued to press for information. • The residents were also, immediately concerned about the Impact on property values of turning residential neighbourhoods into industrial zones through the building of tall transmission towers. Again the presenters came with no process and no recommertdai'ions fat residents about how'to.gath6r information in this regard in order to understand the implications. In fact the. only.pprspectiv6 offer6d v was that Option 1, Markham, was the shortest route and that it was likely the best ' route for their purposes. The imbalance in theirthinking about the cost impact was offensive. • Residents have received letters from Ontario Hydro over the past eight years, as they have purchased their homes, declaring that the intent was to use the towers currently in place for distribution at 26.7KV, randomly as required for redistribution. Some have letters stating that there was no -intent to change the status of the towers for the next ten years. People such as ourselves have invested in purchasing and upgrading our homes with the understanding that there would be no changes. Our financial decisions have been based on these letters and we are at risk of losing our retirement investments (value of our homes). The presenters had no knowledge of these commitments made by . Hydro and made no attempt to gather, copies of the letters. Additionally, they added to.the. anguish of the residents byinadvertently revealing that distribution of power at 44kV was common on the line, reinforcing betrayal of commitments from Hydro. • Only with pressing from the audience was it revealed that Hydro One's 10 year transmission plan was on the web. Since we were not informed of this in advance, no one had educated themselves about the plan prior to the meeting and therefore no informed input could be made. , 2 -138- COUNCIL — JULY 13, 2004 35q' Inadequate Notice Periods _The notice period to the Region of York,'the Town of Markham and to the resident stakeholders has been inadequate and appears to be deliberately so. It is our understanding that the Town of Markham had little understanding of the implications of Hydro One's proposals before the meeting held with residents on April 28'h. JacR Heath (Regional,Councillor) and Dan Horchik (Ward 6 Councillor) were present and unable to explain to residents what the implications of Option•1 were because a) the Hydro One had given its proposal to the Region some 10 days prior to informing the residents and the implications were still under study by regional planners; b) Markham was informed 3 days prior to the meeting and had not had time to assess the implications either. So both residents and their political representatives could not discuss the Implications in order to give adequate input. • Residents were informed In the Economist and Sun newspaper of a meeting. No notices were sent to homes in our area. Given the widely -known Chinese demographic in the area, there was no attempt to allow time for translation of the notice into Chinese so that more residents would be aware of the issue. This again appears to be a deliberate attempt to reduce stakeholder awareness of the proposal. Actions reflective of a'Done Deal' mentality: Hydro One has committed several actions which, appear to disregard Class EA process and which reflect thinking that they can 'ram' the most expedient option through despite significant longer -term risks and issues. Hydro One presented an early June 2004 date as the point at which it would noft'the p.Ublic of its preferred`rdute, How could an assessment, of -all, stakeholder issues we completed and resolved within 4-5 weeks?.How oould.the._ erivironmental impacts of wetlands and'creeke'already impacted by sewer pipe' construction be assessed. It has retracted this date at this time. Gas lines have been marked already. When one utility asks another utility to indicate where its lines are, it is a pretty good signal that the decision, in Hydro One's mind has already been made. • Since construction has already started on a'transfer stollen' at Highway 407, it is unclear whether there really is an'option' to be selected. Hydro One denies that this Is work.in progress on Alternative 1. • Hydro One engineers at the back of the room were overheard commenting that it didn't matter what residents were saying, the project would go through anyway. This adds to resident cynicism about whether the EA process will be a fair one or just rammed through, regardless of risks to property owners and the market area. Additionally, since dates are projected, for construction Spring 2005, it would also appear to be little more .than a political exercise. ' It would appear that the consultation process Is indeed perceived to be a sham. This, provoked many people emotionally at the meeting as it appeared that Hydro One was just playing one group off the other and that it had already decided what it was going to do. Hydro One has called this a reconstruction. This is new construction and semantics should not be allowed to minimize the work that must take place, the significant impact on residential real estate values and the potential damage to fragile environments as a result of the new work. —139— COUNCIL - JULY 13, 2004 360. We request the following: • That the Minister open a file on this issue immediately to track Hydro one compliance to the Class EA Process and to ensure that the intent of the legislation is being honoured. • That the Minister intervene to influence the restatement the objective of the. initiative. Hydro One should,not be playing one community, against the other. Rather It should be searching for an appropriate long-term solution to transmission of power to northern York Region. This should not require turning residential areas into industrial zones. We look forward to a response regarding this critical issue. As my husband and 1 each own a properly related to the above we have listed our names and addresses below. Kind regards, Sherrill Burns Michael Kusner 66 Forester Crescent 11030 Woodbine Avenue Markham, Ontario, L6C 1 V2 PO Box 472, 905-BB7-8781 (work) Gormley, Ontario, LOH 1 GO 905-887-8783 (home) 905-887-8783 (home) 905-887-OB43 (golf range property) Copies to: Sue'Fusco(Sib.i')Sptlkespersonforourstakeholder group Don Cousens, Honourable Mayor Frank Scarpitti, Deputy Mayor Sheila Birrell, Town Clerk, Town of Markham Jack Heath, Regional Councillor Jim Jones, Regional Councillor Bill O'Donnell, Regional Councillor Stan Daudo, Ward 1 Councillor Erin Shapero, Ward 2 Councillor Joseph Virgilio, Ward 3 Councillor George McKelvey, Ward 4 Councillor John Webster, Ward 5 Councillor Dan Horchik, Ward 6 Councillor Khalid Usman, Ward, 7 Councillor AlexChiu, Ward B Councillor .-, -140- 0 COUNCIL — JULY 139 2004 061 BavIn ton, Kitty prom: Nanninga, Barbara on behalf of Cousens, Don Sent: Friday, June 04, 2004 3:00 PM To: Bavington, Kitty subject: FW: Hydro one • Proposed Transmission Line Expansion Project In Markham Dear Sirs, I am writing to voice my strong opposition to the proposed reconstruction of the hydro transmission lines in the Markham area between either Parkway TS or Clairville TS,and Aradtage TS in Nemarket. Av a resident and father of a young sbq who., attends school at St. Monica which is immediately adjacent to qne of, the proposed routes; I am appalled that the sites under consideration for this project run through residential communities and adjacent to St. Monica C.E.S. and Daycare Centre. It is clear to me, having seen the illustrations of the proposed replacement tower designs, that the use of the existing corridors for this expansion oroject is clearly incompatible with the established residential cosmunities, and will surely result in deflated property values and homeowners equity. 4dditionally, I am seriously concerned with the potential health hazards from the increased electromagnetic fields (EMF's) that these lines will emit. Of. particular concern to we is the existing corridor's proximity to St. Monica C.E.S. and St. Monica Daycare Centre on Calvert Road. Scientific studies have shown a link between EMF's and childhood leukemia. I shudder to think that I may be.forced to send my child to school and have him .clay in the shadow of these massive transmission towers. It is inconceivable to me that an organization such as Hydro One would even consider putting the children of our community at risk and diminishing forever the attractiveness and value of our homes. ; do not oppose the expansion of Hydro infrastructure in the area, however, I do not believe that the expansion MDST run through neighborhoods and past schoolyard playgrounds. I believe that alternative routes using other existing corridorssituated in commercial industrial areas and even new routes -in areas away from residential communities should be given consideration over the current proposed routes. Sincerely. Michael A. Cole i —141— _Z y L _ b00Z/4/9 welpueiN 10 RP 2H aIBW 'sweBaa •aup wPRH woq saullaaw Jelpuq 10 poij4ou aq ueo I;e4l os qsq louluoo JnoF uj aweu Rw meld op palm I lmisnlovob ul 'joalmd seolq uolssuusus1l u.B4JPEA ag110 uo!1uawl o41 Bu!soddo XIBU042 we I'Wn0g401au Aw om n •SGwGM Nu PUS suJaOuoo 6w as!w o1 no6 01 BLgNJM we I 'seeJe 1211uapls W 4finw4l 1pnq aq seull sup MI IOU op emald 'sSulaq uewnq Iey10 10 esuedxe aril W euop eq Sly} Wl 1ou op aseeld Incl. earn I •swaplm wagJiJery a4l o; meq noll 4014M uala0pgo pue juawliwwm 910 Jep!suoo ogle esea!d'ua!suecl a slut BuusMum We nM ap4m'1na '.sluaPlsaJ wagpou, a41 of Jamod mp64 6lddne o; uopedllgo pue;uaw;IwWQ0 seg uopezzll4ea o Jno w W48M. a BJode�eun s Bu a sP H ' 01 6H le4M we4pou of Mop,0919 10 spuewep leuolgpp Jol p 41 P w eP I ' Iget I W P •sepJedwd Jno;o sanlen 841 e10e11e 11 'Lllunwwoo Jno to lee; Pus > wl e4; spalie 11 "411ea4.Jno 01 ISGJ4; a sasodloe�jcl eyl 'Ll!unwwoo Jno pug'Jtllwel Jno ul su=uoo amil pasnm sap postaud Jno% 'Aupkana weal pug Geld ue.Jpl!40 Jno w04M po409 aul 01 ssop oS •swompaq Jno of molo oS I rugAoeq Jno dq Gull uoleslwsUeJ1 Jamod 4BI4 a Lions BuIPI1nq.Japlsum uaea uea uoljezlueBJu Jna6 Moy a;eldwe;um )ouum 1' •pMf0ib6q Jno pul4aq mpWoo WpM MwJeu /J' BA a 91 N& L '4194 PUB WPIPdl1 to JGwm 1609WON a4; Lq eell QAJ . . •uwP114o aw41 Jn010 L41ON a41'LBuapodun wow pue'411ea4 Jno A In1Jee1 we GM •Jeal u1 BulnO Mou we am'PJe/0loeq Jno dq aull poA 0M'0¢Z a Bulpnnq u1 ueld au() wp6H elp 40 lutes, ane4 aM aoWs'JenamH 'ul do mwB 01 uwP1140 Jno Jol+Glunwwoo algaloadsw pue eles a ap!nwd 'enlw am ntun eeno4 luesaud uno ul Azle o; we mSQUIP Jnp swewp uowwoo luau!plo,6en aneg pue sJll01 uounJJm LUwIPJo NeJaw we eM 'LllwiU BUnoA a as!eJ o; pua ann of meld eo!u a sl we4>ueyd asnmeq L JI4M 'we411Je1q u!soul uols!oap snolosum a epew ae4 am'Rllwei Jno asle014.unwwm lnlmeed'Glee a Jol Sul40ee0 p uo•IS B a sluapnls aup epeJp wom I pug puegsn4 Aw uo4Js 060 see6 Jnod po4oS 011o4emG'uva! usupll4o Aw slaldi4 to aupow a we I wey>JaVj to;uappaJ a WE I Pug RpJBH alJe aweu Rry L no.( aJe moH 'uuAl-auJeo Jeep 40oZ IZ eunr . eldoed mA0 saultNssjNsuwi" do1S IMd :40elgnS 1411x'u0lBwneS :01 ryd 90:Zt 400Z'40 aunr'AuplJd 4uaS . 'euasnao to 1194Gq uo MegA9G'eBuluusN =01id f4;I)1 'U04Bulneg I30 I aBsg b00Z `EL 1.lnr - 11314n00 COUNCIL — JULY 13, 2004 Council of the Corporation of the Town of Markham June 8, 2004 Petition signed by 468 residents. RE: Proposed New Transmission Line Project from Parkway Transformer Station in Markham to Northern York Region I am a current resident of the Town of Markham and I strongly oppose to the above Project, If such a Project is approved and proceeds, my family and I would be subjected to potentially greater health risk, as well as the adverse financial impact associated with depressed property value of homes situated near higher voltage transmission lines and taller hydro towers. There would also be real and significant mental and psychological burden on each member of my family that we must bear every moment of every day so long as we continue to live under such objectionable conditions. I demand that the subject Project be stopped and that the property rights of the residents of Markham, as well as our right to reasonable use and enjoyment of our homes and the environment be respected and upheld. TO ALL MEMBERS OF COUNCIL. —143— COUNCIL - JULY 13, 2004 SUMMARY PUBLIC MEETING HELD ON TUESDAY, SLTNE 1, 2004 SUB CT: Hydro One Hydro One's transmission line in the Town Markham Hydro one, proposal is to reconstruct the existing towers from the Parkway Transformer Station (TS) to the Buttonville TS located at I& Avenue, to a new style but keep them a similar height as the existing towers that currently support a 230kV line. The towers from Buttonville TS to Armitage TS in Newmarket (currently supporting an 115kV line) are proposed to be replaced with taller towers (60-70 feet taller) to support the 230kV line. Hydro One is providing two alternative types of structures (e.g. towers and poles). NOTICES SENT: e riiaile on iV ;1085noC'iGesrver d• ay•8;.2004, WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS RECEIVED. 1. Response received on April 30, 2004 from Sue Fusco, stating concerns. 2. Response received May 14, 2004 from Kathy Kan, Cachet Woods, - in objection. 3. Response received May 20, 2004 from STOP Steering Committee —in objection. 4. _ Response received May 21, 2004 from Terrence Wong, 3 S Goldring Crescent, Markham ON- in obj •action. 5. Response received May 21, 2004 from Paul and Silvia Scarc611o,110 Forester Crescent, Unionville, ON, L6C 1S2 — in objection. 6. Response received May 21, 2004 from Christine Mo — in objection. 7. Response received May 23, 2004 from Ricky Chow, 92 Golden Tulip Cres, Markham, ON — in objection. 8. Response received May 25, 2004 from Dr. Shawn Seit and Innis Mark — in objection. -144- COUNCIL - JULY 13, 2004 -2- 9. Response'reoeived on May 25; 2004 from lan and Jacqueline Strong,160, and Rodick— in objection. 10. Response received on May 26, 2004 from Sherrill Burns, 66 Forester Crescent, Markham, ON, L6C•1 V2 and Michael Kusner, 11030 Woodbine Avenue, PO Box 472, Gormley, ON, LOH 1GO — in objection. 11. Response received from Ka-Hoi Hadley Wong and Lisa Lee,' 138 Macrill Road, Markham, ON, L6C 2T2 — in objection: 12. Response received from Raman Patel, Unionville — stating concerns. 13. Petition received May 26, 2004. 14, Response received on May 28, 2004 from Enza Stefanovic, 52 Pilgrim .Drive, . . _.Markham; ON; L6G 1V3 =.,in objection. 15. Response received from Pau] Lim-1 in statin co g _ g nceins. .. ... . 16. Response received frcm York Catholic District School Board —145— COUNCIL — JULY 13, 2004 Ielepnane May 26, 2004 RE; School Board Opposes Hydro One Expansion Trustees ' Elizabeth Crowe Chair of the Board Dear St, Monica CES' Sta$ Parents/Guardians, - ' AumraMing/ wltllchumiri-slouBVQle At last nightb Board meeting, York Catholic District School Board Trustees • Dino Giuliani Passed the following motion: Vice -chair Vaughan o e. (Woodbridge. THAT, based on preliminary. information received from our external Ward Areaa Ward 2) consultant, the York Catholic District School Board a I Theresa McNlcol environmental strongly Proposed Transmission Line Route outlined as y objects to the East llrimburyf GeorginafNevmarket Alternative 1. ' Carol Cation Madd,am - [Alternative 1 is the hydro corridor adjacent to St. Monica.] (rhamNNUnlgnvllle) FiankAlezanAer,' ' •, �y obl.ecting dgtoA]ternativel,ibis.esnotimply:fhotth'eYCDSaiis . Markham .. (Millikentmarmami , .. -in agreement with Alternative 2:)- ' Unbnvule) - Mike Rizzi Our extemal environmental consultant is continuing to field test. However, we are Richmond NIP pleased to report that existing magnetic fi eld measurements at St. Monica (in Ann slang areas closest to the transmission lines) were found to be negligible. As promised, Richman NIII we will make the final report available to the St. Monica school community once Teresa Claravella complete, Vaughan (Maple/kfelnhurg) We will be expressing our Board's opposition to the hydro expansion to Hydro - Micheal Gamovh fficials, municipal politicians, York Region Health Services and to the One oP P Vaughaann (Woodbridge, Ministry of Education. Ama 3; Wan! 31 Joe spineto We are committed to safeguarding the health and well being of our students and Vaughan (STgrhhllVCuncurd) staff and will keep yo'u informed of our progress on this important issue. Sincerely; Susan LaRosa Susan F. LaRosa Director of Education Director of Education —146— COUNCIL — JULY M 2004 Page 1 of 2 Importance: High Mr Van Beek & Mrs. Cotton: I have left a message for the Chair of Council for the Armitage Vlilage Public School to the MacQt kh and I have act to take affect in the next spoken to Bryce FJdeddge of the plant Opt of my Board. I am a future Hydro concemad parent from the k Markham area who has attended an information centm in our region regarding a fafure Hydro One proj month.l strongly believe tits matter requires your awareness artlte least act imposes on our I ani deeply concerned and have ublic meeting was parentsother sharing aligh alighted with huge flaws In the this process. The communities. Markham's p Catholic attendants were who have taken aretheiof the to ramras homesnand ptwnelthlem with this slrrf°rrecetl°n.Needless uncil at St. Monica to the Thit ursday ay evening nin9 (AP furiouspeople was appalled that 1ressing l' the for hours k ran only 35 r al aI attended the nts attended, It Public info lght on fortunately meta Newmarket parent who heard my oppositions and chose to join a group emerging from These propoosed Hydro asked ne or iJor�tware overaokedtn nol'Ifcetl n oo 01 8 as We n tthelNorth ked hand of the at all eroute juols sttas curse of the vin ery apparent than a ProcePss chosen has hugeltlawsiand demands action. The decision sforeeasted for an apology was offered from team It s very epp beginning of June 2004 .., Hydroo One team members have Ini9ated this process with huge disregard for the, sWderds'and the ales a d 't t. 'The expansion calls for a very questionable and controv6mial 23dkV of power runhill throu¢h the edlace one properties or homes, schools end some businesses from the Markham tranfarmer stations to the Armitage one It thisalmost roject concludes nd the other alternative a only plasion may cdy be made?es this ImpositionM n other neighborhoods in the west end ll thee ng city, We don't seethe solution in having two neighborhoods rallying to win an infdngemant on the othen currently We ate dose of ions of podealiwenWhat ttheyrarerlesk asdrenaking us to consis'rdertm0 than t pies the voltage anas d he see iha s Is fir r exposure and risks associated With n Maesthaticaly unp aEF transmission.tsing andscap a and ihretatens the vitality o9 urh that arises Issues of property communities and environment. The sad thing Is that many residents either were not property informed or they don't understand what their . pubpall ads actually mean for us. We Onion. Thep public opin oded n arganize ccordig to them additional public be addressed and eanside ed with ether safer,routesfar tt!s.e!tpaP P but frankly what I have seen to date is that th8y.tiave sVategically kept people,Inthedektoli arents o opposition. WE do require numbers to make this happen. is this a poncard you, accsheord Your patens du have e, choice to make. Some may not have Issues and are able to express their views accordingly: Please contact me at home (905) 887.2173 or e-mail this weekend to further this discussion have received as this decision to established with s Hydra iact 15 nformation about all of this but it seem as tthrictions ough this Parentimsident groups going to nene Co. you ed the interventionname School Trustees and the assistance of municipal govemmenl members. Some have already shown suppn at Markham Town Offices. I thank you in advance for your immediate attention to this, and I await a response from you at the earlicourse est your Municipal representativesrgeyou to forward this and anyone cone roedul will also forward informationyoMembers website withtfacts on this subject from another parent. Regards, —147— COUNCIL - JULY 13, 2004 _ Page 2 of 2 Sue Fusco Faith Rep on the St. Monica Catholic School Council & Spokesperson for the Concerned Residents of Markham i -148- COUNCIL — JULY 19, 2004 page I of 3 Subject: Hydro ,one's Whattve our schools Hello Everyone: like aresives to f Cachet that Hydro One plans to 6th Ave and oionstrud noe Gate wrpowerlines lhetlwill run througast week of hnourrhomes and fs schools., Many residents wh m of SO Infand were nut ormation sessionsware of offereddars tan as no mailing was received by them or it was received by Hydro placed an ad In a community paper that is not received by all. Your heals for these sessions blamed Canada Post or the late or absent notices. This has demonstrated that H dro was negligent In how it has communicated its plan. Y sal by us. we fully believe that Hydro One intentionally did so hoping that it could sgp thispropo would he" . 1f Hydroytas'really wanted tel inforril share, kq propcsal with us and had nothing hidea�oer d strihrrtinq Included not(geswlthbGr monthlyblllsmopthsmadvancelnadditiontgplacl:gads. p P 'sepersleoopoil ces Was it also negligent or deliberate that York Region Separate School re dire y Is t Is only when sonf the parents called and the schools scow they found foout. affethem were not evensuch and they wererbombarded With questions qulesgens regarding the safety of the chill I school and On the other hand, our, School Trustee and Supertandant of School Board claims that they were taken by surprise and had no idea that Hydro had this proposal. We find in very questionable that a major stakeholder, being the schools and the school board would not have known of Hydrds Intention. oral Set The City of Markham Is also negligent In not properly informing its own residents of Markham, the prop faith by HYdro.. Let it be knowp in this small to all efyou that WE ARE CEFIHETELY OPPOSED SO SHE PROPOSAL BY .' HYDRO ONE TO CONSTRUCT NEW TRANSMISSION TOWERS that Wlll•cany 235KV of current through the new lines. create ave called The community and stop transm Itfnig that are Pe ple)e We have throtugh ressarchgether Und huncovered very disturbing Information r.TA.P ragarding Hydros. Each day we are finding more and more disturbing information and unethical prachcea and deliberate decelL We have met with resident who have offered even more distudn9 information about Hydro and has lad to our evenl when pot nfiel now buhas yersbeen e pll and addressed anning this for any ears and d5iffbarat s regarding thefew'sting towers. its plan, Many were told that they either were Inactiva or would be taken down in the near future. They also said that there were no plans to construct any new towers In our area. —149— COUNCIL — JULY 13, 2004 Page 2 of 3 Moreover, since developers were also told this line, had passed this on to potential home buyers indicating to them there was nothing to worry about. There seems to be a callous and total disregard for the health, safety and enjoyment of people especially the children of the communties that this proposal will affect It seems that everyone turns the'otherway when It doesn't affect them directly.' The tendency is "if it Is not in my backyard" who cares? Many residents of our community in Markham and Unionville live In the most prestigious areas. Many people invested hundreds of thousands of dollars on their properties, and such a project will definetly lower the property values of homes in the area and will drive longtime residents away. Such residents include prominent business people and professionals. Markham prestige will be lost. Please also remember that a large portion of the population in Markham and Richmond Hilt are Asian, Almost all of them including myself practice Feng Shut. Fang Shul centers around the flow of positive energy. These towers are totally against the Fang Shul principle as the energy that it will emit is seen as highly negative and will bring ill health and !II wealth. All residents not just asian's do not want to open their front or back doors and see these towers that will stand over 150 #t whether they are towers or poles, every 100ft. More importantly, the risk of ill health associated with EMF. Hydro's position is that there is no absolute association with leukemia, cancer, illnesses associated with EMF. This Is not true. Studies have been done internationally and has indicated that there Is a correlation between higher percentage of people having Illnesses that are exposed to EMF, Even Hydro's own book adm!ts'such correlation,.but claim's wli not absolute.:. Let me bring your ,attentiori'to the argument for absolute. You do not have to have 100% absolute to'stop' anything that is not 100"/" safe. The mere existence of the risk and potential fog harm is all that should be ' required to say NO! Secondhand smoke was a huge debate 10-15 years ago. Back then all the studies that have been done claim that there Is no absolute proof that exposure to second hand smoke is detrimental to anyone's health. Now 15 years later, it is now finally admitted that not only is second hand smoke harmful to one's health but it can be equally harmful as the smoker. Now, smoking is almost 100% banned in any indoor enviomment.. Must we put ourselves and our greatest resources (our children) at risk and find out 15 years later when someone finally admits the truth, and have the risk of people having an illness that was a result of EMF exposure over the years. St. Monica'sas right next to the ROW and our•ch!Idten go to leain and play less, than 150 6 from the ROW of the. proposed line. Portables sibdirectly below one of the towers now. The children of St Monica and St: Monica's ' Day Care centre are all primary level ages 2 years 13 years. This is the age where these dhildreh's cells are developing. Exposure to EMF at this age can have very harmful health affects. What about the teachers in the schools. Since when did teaching our future become a health hazard. I am sure the local union will be quite interested, not to mention that already parents have vowed that if this is not stopped, they will remove their children from the school. What about those children who can not move. Imagine their fear of having to stay. The other question that has been asked is why was St. Monica's allowed or chose to be built In its current site next to towers when it owns property just one block away East of Village Gate Drive and Calvert. The further negligence by the school board is that no measurements have been done since the school opened 10 years ago, Such milligaus readings should be done annually. We all must look ahead and implement new infrastructures of how we can meet the demands for power to our communities as the region grows. We work hard and protecting natural habitats, and wildlife, but not people? Where is the logic? —150— COUNCIL - JULY 13, 2004 Page 3 of 3 Money has to be spent, but it will be saved tenfoids down the road. Is the government and Utility companies prepared for the massive consequences should people actually develop illnesses and diseases as a result. Is our health care system prepared to handle it? Will both be prepared for class action lawsuits that will result? S.T.O.P will continue to oppose Hydro One and we will be very visible and loud and we will command every resource through media attention,finances, political and legal resources, and community enforcement to challenge you. We ask that everyone take a careful look at the pandora's box that this will open. WE DEMAND ANOTHER ALTERNATIVE TO HYDRO ONE'S PROPOSAL. IT IS OUR RIGHT AND YOUR DUTY TO DO SO, for the people you are to represent and are accountable to and for the children who you are morally and legally obligated to protect. I I -151- COUNCIL — JULY 13, 2004 May 20a' 2004 Mayor Donald Cousens & Members of Markham Council:. , purpose of this letter is to seek your support in passing a resolution to prevent Ioyo- The prop strongly opposed er One from adding new power lines in the Roddick Road Corridor. We are strop y this plan, and have created a community group know as STOP (Stop Transmission -lines Over People) to help coordinate efforts and raise the community's concerns. Tfie proposed installation of new 230Kv double cuit 145 cirHydro Lines and construction of new foot towers High by Hydro -One concerns us for the following reasons: (1) Health concerns for our children and ourselves a. Members of our community live and work very close to the hydro lines, the current lines are back up lines and do not pose a threat as such. The construction of new 145 foot towers, with much higher voltage lines which are in some cases only 40 feet away from our backyards, would be a potential threat to our safety and health (See Appendix A) b.; St. Monica Catholic School, where many of our children spend a significant part :of the day,'is direotly adjachnf to the lines.. (2) Environmental concerns tiv exists in a. The construction will impact habitat that the comidorand the additionalconstrucion of megaowe will adversely affect the surrounding ecosystems (3) property devaluation and business impact concerns a. The reality is that the public sees active hydro transmission towers as a concern, This directly translates in decreased property values. Do a search for any ProPeriy that is backing onto the hydro corridor (at www.mis.ca) and you will find that any properties are presently for sale for approximately $50,000.00 below those that ines are not to their homers up fody cause r sale and look for a beitei cothe com. mmimity to live in.. ' own p We thought Markham was one of the best communities to live in! I! make b. Increasing the height of the towers and raising the throughput will only matters worse. Property values are expected to drop 10-20%, almost $50,000 to $150,000+. Who will pay for these losses? act the c. The affect of decreased property values and out flux of residences will imp entire town of Markham including businesses in the town. COUNCIL — JULY 13, 2004 (4) Incompatibility of the new construction with the look and feel of our community. a. The current towers are imposing as they currently stand but the construction of new bigger towers will significantly affect look and feel of our community, sticking out like a sore thumb. The home owners in Markham and communities 'of Cachet Woods, Cachet Estates, Jennings Gate, Victoria Square, and Cathedral Town do not deserve this. As taxpayers they should have some kind of prdtection by the civil servants that they pay for and support. b. The entire affected area will cease to be vibrant and outgoing. We presently are living in stress and fear that the new lines will put our health at risk, and this has and will translate into decreased outdoor activity (no more backyard barbeques) and further contribute to the out flux. Your constituents and neighbors need you. We need and request your support. We look forward to meeting with you to further discuss our concerns and how you can be of service... We will be calling your office to make an appointment this week. Once again, we need you, the community needs you, and the Town needs you, we are counting on you... please do not disappoint us. :Sincerely' - STOP Steering Committee. 1I� —153— htln•//ww�.v ctnn_rmf na � COUNCIL — JULY 13, 2004 Appendix !Sample Research A! We have researched this issue and determined that there is a positive correlation between Hydro line proximity/voltage and human health. For example, there is substantial evidence that exposure to extra -low frequency.(ELF) magnetic fields of an. average intensity doubles the risk of a child contracting leukemia. There is very good evidence that even -momentary exposure:to ELF increase by a factor of 5 that a woman will have a spontaneous abortion within the first 10 weeks of pregnancy. There is also evidence that these fields are associated with other diseases. Further, countries, such as the UK, Italy, Sweden, has strong restrictions on above ground power lines in neighborhoods, and in fact the UK requires approval from the secretary of state. In , • addition to our research the undeniable fact remains that the public perception and belief is that Power -line are dangerous to ones health and also, and generally not considered positive additions to a residential community, physically and environmentally. Some sample research for you to review - they describes the results of recent studies on both humans and animals (Please see below). 1) Saturday, February 7, 2004 (Source: Seattle Post) High -voltage lines, negative ions and rats . Tests show how personal toxic cloud of ozone is created By TOM'PAUL30N.,; SEA77lE.P0ST:INTE7,LIGENCER REPORTER `• ` ' Based on experiments involving rats and ozone, scientists at the Pacific Northwest National Laboratory have identified a chemical reaction that may explain higher rates of illness observed among some people exposed to strong electromagnetic f elds such as those produced by high - voltage power lines." 2) October 2002 (Source: htt //,vNvfv dhs ca gov/psldeode/ehiblemf/RiskEvaluation/riskeval.htin The final report of the California Department of Health Services on the risks of EMF exposure has been released and is available online: This evaluation is based upon -the results of published research studies , the NIEHS Working Group Report, and studies conducted by the California EMF Program. It was prepared by three scientists who workfor the Department of Health Services (DHS). As stated in the report's Executive Summary: To one degree or another, all three of the DHS scientists are inclined to believe that EMFs can cause some degree of increased risk of childhood leukemia, adult brain cancer, Lou Gehrig's Disease, and miscarriage. They strongly believe that EMFs do not increase the risk of birth defects, or low birth weight. They strongly believe that EMFs are not universal carcinogens, since there are a number of cancer types that are not associated with EMF exposure. "The conclusions of the California scientists relied more upon studies of human populations and less upon animal and cell studies than most earlier evaluations. —154- - e f 3 COUNCIL - JULY 13, 2004 -155- COUNCIL - JULY 13, 2004 ATTACHMENT 5 -156- COUNCIL — JULY 13, 2004 ATTACHMENT 3.6 ONTARIO HYDRO CORRIDOR a) The lands designated as Open Space and indicated as Hydro Right -of - Way on Schedule'AA' - DETAILED LAND USE PLAN, attached hereto, are lands owned by Ontario Hydro and used for an electric power transmission corridor. b) Lands used by Ontario Hydro for electric power transmission may also be used for: other utility uses satisfactoryto Ontario Hydro and compatible with adjacent land uses; and ii) Park and Open Space and other complementary uses, in accordance with the policies of this Plan, and in accordance with the requirements of Ontario Hydro and its successors. c) Where appropriate, recreational trails shall be considered for the Ontario Hydro Utility Corridor. 3.7 URBAN DESIGN a) The lands within the Bayview Wellington North Secondary Plan Area shall be developed and designed as an extension of the Bayview Wellington Centre development, with respect to the overall urban design principles such that the two plans, when built out, will function as a cohesive community. b) Urban design guidelines prepared forthe Bayview Wellington Community shall be implemented in a accordance with the requirements of the Town. These guidelines shall provide direction on key elements of the community structure, that can affectthe quality of the urban environment. Specifically, these guidelines are intended to promote the attractiveness of the streetscape, enhance human presence and promote architectural qualities of buildings, while de-emphasizing the predominance of garage oriented streetscapes, and encourage pedestrian activity. All proposals for development in the Bayview Wellington North Secondary Plan Area shall have regard for these Urban Design Guidelines. ir7 —157— COUNCIL — JULY 13, 2004 f) Landscape treatment along the rear and flankage of lots abutting St. John's Sideroad shall be required as a condition of draft approval to improve the visual aesthetics of this area. g) Mitigative measures to be implemented shall have regard for, but are not limited to: guidelines provided by Canadian National Railways, and the Region of Yorkwith respectto minimizingthe noise, vibration and other impacts of transportation facilities on adjacent lands, particularly those adjacent to St. John's Sideroad; ii) guidelines provided by the Ministry of the Environmentwith respect to maintaining adequate separation distances and noise attenuation, between residential dwellings and nuisances such as industrial uses; and III) provision of additional sufficient rear yard depths to accommodate any required mitigative measures such as berming, landscaping, and fencing, in addition to providing a sufficient useable outdoor amenity area, shall be provided through the subdivision plan, to the satisfaction of the Town, for all residential lots backing onto the Ontario Hydro Corridor. Where residential lots are adjacent to or back onto commercial/industrial lands, additional sufficient rear or side yard depths shall be provided through the subdivision plan to accommodate both the required mitigative measures, if any, and a useable yard area. h) All mitigative and buffering measures where required shall be implemented in such a manner so as to provide sufficient useable outdoor living areas for residents. r*: —158— COUNCIL - JULY 13, 2004 .AGENDA ITEM # 9 TOWN OF AURORA COUNCIL REPORT No. PW04-027 SUBJECT: Award of Tender No. PW-2004-05 - Reduce Extraneous Flows in the Wastewater Collection System FROM: W. H. Jackson, Director of Public Works DATE: July 13, 2004 RECOMMENDATIONS THAT Tender No. PW2004-05 for the works to "Reduce Extraneous Flows in the Wastewater Collection System" be awarded to Liqui-Force Services (Ontario) Inc. at its tendered price of $494,525 (excluding GST); THAT Council authorize the Mayor and Municipal Clerk to execute the attached Form of Agreement between the Town of Aurora and Liqui-Force Services (Ontario) Inc.; and THAT Report PW04-027 be referred to the Regional Municipality of York with a request that the Region consider increased sewage capacity allocation for the Town of Aurora because of the reduction of extraneous flows into the Regional sewer system as a result of the implementation of Tender No. PW2004-05. BACKGROUND Council, at its meeting of November 25, 2003, in considering Report PW03-041 (copy attached as Appendix A), resolved in part:, "THAT the remedial measures recommended for the Town of Aurora by the Region's Sanitary Sewer Systems Infiltration and Inflow Study to reduce extraneous flows be implemented with respect to mainline sewer and manhole rehabilitation." Several remedial measures have been recommended to minimize the infiltration of ground water and inflow of storm water into the sanitary sewer system, including in part, the relining of sewers, rectifying maintenance hole defects and converting combined sanitary/storm sewers to single use sewers. With respect to the combined sewers (specifically in the Mosley Street area), the work at this time is to investigate and report on the options available with associated costs. -159- COUNCIL — JULY 13, 2004 July 13, 2004 - 2 - Report No. PW04-027 The project was included in the 2004 Capital Budget approved by Council. COMMENTS Project Description The project work areas are in various locations in Town. Priority work will be undertaken in identified high infiltration areas noted in the Region's report specifically the Mark Street Subdivision located northeast of Yonge Street and Wellington Street East between Mark Street and Catherine Avenue, and the South East quadrant of Town located between Wellington Street East and Metcalfe Street. The works called for in the Tender include various trenchless technology practices to rehabilitate and repair piping systems and maintenance holes to both reduce extraneous flows and improve the overall service performance of the Town's wastewater collection network. For example, the work to control infiltration requires various combined activities, such as sewer line cleaning, T.V. assisted robotic reaming, closed circuit television video (CCTV) inspection for both mainline and service laterals, sewer flow control, point repairs (liners) and grout sealing. It is noted that the control or elimination of storm and/or ground water from the sanitary sewer system is a significant capacity improvement element. It is estimated that at capacity, upwards of 70% of the flow in certain sections of the Regional sewer system consists of storm water. The specific measured extraneous flows in the target areas of this contract were measured during the Region's study and are in the range of 50%. Accordingly, it can, be seen that the works to be undertaken for this contract will have a significant benefit to the capacity and service performance of the Town's sanitary sewer system as well as benefiting the capacity of the Region's sanitary sewer system. Tender Process The project was tendered on June 1, 2004 and on Friday, June 18, 2004 the Tender Opening Committee opened two Tenders with the following prices: TENDERER TENDER PRICE (Excluding GST) Liqui-Force Services Inc. $494,525.00 D.M. Robichaud Associates Ltd $586,415.00 A total of 4 companies purchased the tender documents. The Tender was issued by the Town's Treasury Department and advertised according to the requirements of the Town's standard purchasing procedures. —160— COUNCIL — JULY 13, 2004 July 13, 2004 - 3 - Report No. PW04-027 Project Costs Tendered costs were based on estimated quantities of typically associated works necessary to fulfil the project's goals and objectives. Unit costs for various items were requested to serve as a basis to estimate and for Tender comparison. In this Tender, the Town approves all work quantities. Individual work items (cleaning, CCTV inspection, lining etc.) may be increased or decreased depending on the specific circumstances. As such, the cost of the submitted tender provides our best estimate of the costs to fulfil the Region's recommended actions. Discussion Both submitted Tenders met all the requirements for the project and were evaluated by an internal Evaluation Committee. As well as the Tendered costs, the submissions were evaluated on various criteria to establish the Contractor's experience, knowledge and acceptability. It is noted that under the "Local Municipal Impact" section in the Regional report that was considered at their Council meeting of June 26, 2003, it is stated, "Eliminating extraneous flow benefits the local municipalities as it frees up sewer capacities for future growth". OPTIONS Council may not wish to proceed with this project. FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS Council had previously approved funds in the amount of $500,000 in the 2004 Capital Budget from the Sewer Reserve Account. For Council's further information, GST funds in the amount of $34,616.75 will also be paid and recovered for this project. CONCLUSIONS Liqui-force Services (Ontario) Inc. has successfully completed previous trenchless infrastructure rehabilitation works throughout the Town. All Tender requirements have been fulfilled and it is suggested that the Tender submitted by the Liqui-Force Services (Ontario) Inc. 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. —161— COUNCIL - JULY 13, 2004 13, 2004 - 4 - Report No. PW04-027 ATTACHMENTS • Appendix "A" - Council Report No. PW03-041 • Appendix "B" - 2004 Capital Budget Sheet • Appendix "C" -Form of Agreement -Tender - PW2004-05 PRE -SUBMISSION REVIEW Management Team Meeting - July 7, 2004 Prepared by. Peter Horvath, Water and Wastewater Supervisor, ext. 3446 /�/ //, /-, - �J- , " 1. � W. H. J n Director of Public Works -162- COUNCIL - JULY 13, 2004 Appendix A TOWN OF AURORA COUNCIL REPORT No. PVV03-041 SUBJECT: York Region - Sanitary Sewer Systems Infiltration and inflow Study FROM: W. H. Jackson, Director of Public Works - DATE: November 25, 2003 RECOMMENDATIONS THAT Report No. PW03-041 entitled ."York Region - Sanitary Sewer Systems Infiltration and Inflow Study be received for information; ended for the Town of Aurora by the Region's THAT the remedial measures recomm Sanitary Sewer Systems Infiltration and Inflow Study to reduce extraneous flows be implemented with respect to mainline sewer and manhole rehabilitation only as generally described in Report PW03-041; THAT staff be requested to report to Council after reviewing the Region's remaining remedial measures including determination of. The level of participation by affected homeowners and subsequent costs with respect to the disconnection of roof leaders and foundation drains; and The viability and costs of converting the combined sanitary and storm water sewer in the Mosley Street area into. two separate sewers; an, THAT York Region be informed of Council's direction in this matter. BACKGROUND York Region Council at its meeting of June 26, 2003 adopted recommendations contained in their Clause No. 7, Report No. 6 of the Transportation and Works Committee regarding an update on the Sanitary Sewer Systems Infiltration and Inflow Study undertaken by the Region in consultation with the Towns of Aurora, Newmarket, and Richmond Hill. These recommendations are based on excessive amounts of infiltration and inflow (infil/ inflo) identified entering the above municipal sanitary sewer systems that have exceeded the system's design flows. -1 63- COUNCIL — JULY 13, 2004 November 25,.2003 - 2 - Report No. PW03-041 COMMENTS 1.0 Sanitary System Overview ` Sanitary sewers are designed to collect human'generated liquid and solid wastes from internal plumbing sources (i.e. toilets, bathtubs, sinks, etc.) that require treatment prior to being discharged into renewable water resources such as lakes and rivers. These sewers are designed and sized according• to historical and engineered data collected and subsequently, treatment plants are sized accordingly. Excessive amounts of infil/inflo not only take up'some of the sewer system's designed collection capacity but also reduce the available treatment capacity, and subsequently increase the treatment cost. Infiltration is described as groundwater entering sewers through" defective joints and broken pipes, while inflow is water discharged into sewers from sources such as roof leaders and foundation drains. 2.0 Study The study employed both CCTV (closed circuit television video) inspection by the Town's Public Works staff (as part of the Department's continuing proactive maintenance program) and flow monitoring by Region staff. Two specific areas were identified by the study that indicated excessive infil/inflo. 2.1 Mark Street Subdivsion This area is located northeast of Yonge and Wellington Streets between Mark Street and Catherine Avenue. The area is over 50 years old and most of the original sewers have been replaced with PVC (polyvinyl chloride) pipe. However, there are areas that still have the original asbestos cement and concrete sewer pipes that currently exhibit structural defects including cracks, broken pipes and displaced joints. Roof leaders of at least 6 homes and foundation drains of approximately 146 homes were also identified as connected to the sewer system. 2.2 South of Wellington Street This area is located southeast of Yonge and Wellington Streets between Wellington Street East and Metcalfe Street. Conditions are similar to that of the Mark Street Subdivision in termsof replacement and current conditions. Roof leaders of at least 4 homes and foundation drains of approximately 286 homes were also identified as connected to the sewer system. In addition, a major contributor of inflow in this area includes an existing combined (i.e. sanitary and storm water) sewer that runs diagonally from Wells Street to Yonge Street. —164- COUNCIL — JULY 13, 2004 November 25, 2003 - 3 - Report No. PW03-041 3.0 Remedial Measures Several measures have been recommended by the Region study to minimize the infil/inflo into the above area's sewer systems. 3.1 Sewer Lining Approximately 1440 metres of sewer would be relined utilizing the trenchless technology currently employed by the Department. This is a cost effective alternative to replacement which involves excavation and restoration. The Region's estimated cost to reline the entire subject sewer is slightly less than $500,000. The Town's ongoing maintenance program, with proposed yearly increases as detailed in the 2004-2008 "Financial Outlook" document provides for the completion of this work within one to two years. 3.2 Rectify Maintenance Holes Damaged covers, loose rims, and upper structure joints of approximately 15 maintenance holes would be repaired by various surface excavation and restoration techniques. Estimated cost for the above is $7,000. 3.3 Disconnect Roof Leaders Approximately 10 homes would have their roof leaders disconnected from the sewer system by plugging the leader at ground level. These leaders would then be redirected.to drain directly onto the ground via a splash pad. This work is on private property, and accordingly, co-operation of the homeowners would be required. Estimated cost is approximately $20,000. 3.4 Disconnect Foundation Drains Although approximately 432 homes have been identified as having their drains connected to the sewer system, the Region is anticipating only 25% participation (109 homes). This is due to work being on private property and that homeowner co- operation will be required, especially with the provision of sump pumps in the homes. Estimated costs are unknown at this time, as the cost of disconnection will vary from home to home. 3.5 Convert Combined Sewer Preliminary analysis indicate that a portion of the sewer north of Mosley Street can be converted into a storm sewer, while south of Mosley Street the remaining portion can be converted into a sanitary sewer. Additional investigation and review will be required to determine the feasibility and costs. —165— COUNCIL — JULY 13, 2004 November 25, 2003 - 4 - Report Np. PW03-041 4.0 Next Steps Town staff has actively participated in the Regional study as part of an overall working group with the other affected municipalities, ,and further, co-ordination is essential to determine an effective implementation plan. 4.1 Categorization of Remedial Measures Although the Region has yet to detail the cost and benefit analysis of the recommended remedial measu'res, they have identified that sewer -lining, rectification of maintenance holes, disconnection of roof leaders, and conversion of the combined sewer are "high priority", while disconnecting the foundation drains is "low priority". 4.2 Current Undertakings Public Works continues to have a proactive sanitary sewer maintenance program including flushing, CCTV, and rehabilitation. This ongoing initiative will include the above noted Mark Street and south of Wellington Street areas with respect to mainline sewers and maintenance holes. 4.3 Future Undertakinqs The Town will need to identify homeowners willing to participate in the disconnection of the roof leaders and/or foundation drains, determine the subsequent costs, and review the program's cost effectiveness, prior to the startof any work. With respect to the combined, sewer, additional investigation and discussions between Town and Region staff will be required to better determine costs. OPTIONS Council may wish to accelerate the sewer relining program by directing that more funds be allocated in the Capital Works "Infrastructure Rehabilitation" program. CONCLUSIONS Although the Region's study has identified two major infil/inflo areas of concern within Aurora, these concerns are not limited to the Town. Therefore, a concentrated effort among all three affected municipalities and the Region will be required to ensure full benefit of the remedial initiatives. Public Works, over the past several years, has implemented a proactive sanitary sewer rehabilitation program incorporating both mainline and manhole infiltration reducing construction techniques, and the identified areas will be included as part of the Department's ongoing program. —166— MUNCIL — JULY 13, 2004 November 25, 2003 - 5 - Report No. PW03-041 In addition, further investigation is required for Council's consideration regarding the disconnection of roof leaders and foundation drains, and converting the combined sewer into two separate sewers. FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS 4 R Council approved funds have been allocated in the 2003 Public Works Capital Budget Program in the amount of $300,000 for the rehabilitation of sanitary sewers. For2004 and beyond, increased funds have been.budgeted for Council's consideration as part of the Financial Outlook 2004-2008 document. It is anticipated that the cost of the infiltration rehabilitation required forthe mainline sewers and maintenance holes (approximately $510,000) will be included on a priority basis as determined by the Department's current and future 10 Year Infrastructure Capital Programs, which are annually approved by Council. It should be noted that these preliminary costs were provided by the Region's consultant and will be verified by actual tender costs. The costs for the remaining disconnection and sewer conversion work is yet to be identified, and will be subject to 'a separate report to be presented for Council's consideration sometime in 2004 after discussions with both residents and York Region. LINK TO STRATEGIC PLAN Goal "A" speaks to maintaining a well -managed and fiscally responsible Municipality. ATTACHMENTS • Clause 7, Report No. 6 of Transportation and Works Committee, adopted without amendment by Region Council at its meeting on June 26, 2003. • 2003 Public Works Capital Budget Sheet. PRE -SUBMISSION REVIEW Management Team Meeting — November 19, 2003 Prepared by: Ken Lauppe, Manager of Operations Services, Ext. 542 Peter Horvath, Water/Wastewater Supervisor, Ext. 546 /// Lam, _ W. H. JackgbA Director of Public Works —167— COUNCIL — JULY 13, 2004 York. Regto�c June 27. 2003 Mr. Bob Panizza Director, Corporate Services Town of Aurora P.O. Box 1000, 100 John West Wav Aurora. Ontario L4G Dear Mr. Panizza: Re: Status Update Sanitary Sewer Systems Infiltration and Inflow Study 'ore of the Regional Clerk Corporate Semiret Department CORP. SERVICES DEPT. COPIES CIRCULATED TO: Members of Council C.A.O. Directors t,J• 4a*fti 54W l Other The Council of the Regional Municipality of York, at its meeting held on Thursday, June 26, 2003 adopted. without amendment, the attached Clause No. 7, Report No. 6 of the Transportation and Works Committee. B� the: idoption of the foregoing clause, Regional Council has authorized the following: I. This report be received for information by the Transportation and Works Committee and Regional Council. 2. The Towns of Aurora, Newmarket and Richmond Hill be requested to implement the remedial measures as recommended.by the Sanitary Sewer Systems Infiltration and Inflow Study to reduce extraneous flows. 3. The Regional Clerk forward a copy of this report to the Clerks of the Towns of Aurora, Newmarket and Richmond Hill. A copy of Clause No. 7, Report No. 6 of the Transportation and Works Committee is attached for your information. Sincerely, Denis Kelly Regional Clerk Elm a nson-mg Attac meet Copy to: C6mmissioner of Transportation and Works off-f-C COUNCIL — JULY 13, 2004 THE REGIONAL MUNICIPALITY OF YORK "� Transportation and Works Committee June 18, 2003 Report of the - Commissioner of Transpbrtation and. Works STATUS UPDATE SANITARY SEWER SYSTEMS INFILTRATION AND INFLOW STUDY 1. RECOMMENDATIONS It is recommended that: 1. This report be received for information by the Transportation and Works Committee and Regional Council 2. The Towns of Aurora, Newmarket and Richmond Hill be requested to implement the remedial measures as recommended by the Sanitary Sewer Systems Infiltration and Inflow Study to reduce extraneous flows. The Regional Clerk forward a copy of this report to the Clerks of the Towns of Aurora, Newmarket and Richmond Hill. 2. PURPOSE The purpose of this report is to provide Council with an update on the Sanitary Sewer Systems Infiltration and Inflow Study currently undertaken by the Region in consultation with the Towns of Aurora, Newmarket and Richmond Hill. 3. BACKGROUND The 1997 York -Durham Sewage System (YDSS) Master Plan identified that sewage flows in York Region, especially the northern reach of the YDSS trunk sewer servicing the Towns of Aurora, Newmarket and Richmond Hill are collecting an excessive amount of inflow and infiltration (1/I). Infiltration is groundwater entering sewers through defective joints and broken pipes. Inflow is water discharged into sewers from sources such as roof leaders and foundation drains. High infiltration and inflow increase treatment cost and reduce available capacity. To identify the sources of I/I and develop a remedial program, an I/I study was'7";ated. Stafffrom the three local municipalities were invited to provide inputs and wi... _-,eir co- operation, the terms of reference for the study were developed. Subsequently, on May 11, 2000 the Regional Council approved the implementation of the UI study and retained Mac", iro Consultants Inc. as the consultant for -the work. —169— , COUNCIL - JULY 13, 2004 Y infiltration and Inflow Study for Sanitary Sewer Systems Update 56 4 4. ANALYSIS AND OPTIONS The Infiltration and Inflow Study comprises the following main tasks: • Conduct an extended flow monitoring program at selected locations within the Reeional YDSS and the local collection systems to isolate 1/I flow problems to identifiable areas. • Analyze the monitoring results and identify problem areas and the sources of extraneous flows. • Prepare a detailed remedial program identifying and prioritizing the remedial measures. 4.1 Flow Monitoring Flow monitoring was carried out in Aurora, Newmarket and Richmond Hill to identify the sources of extraneous flows. A 3-stage monitoring program was implemented with Stage 1 covering broad areas and each subsequent stage zeroing in on more specific areas to progressively converge on the problem sources. The monitoring program extended over a period of two years in order to obtain sufficient data during the wet and dry seasons to allow for the correlation of rainfall data and extraneous flows. It commenced in September 2000 and ended in September 2002. A total of thirty metering stations were used. 4.2 Problem Areas and Sources of Extraneous Flows With the completion of the flow monitoring program, seven problem areas with high extraneous flows primarily located within the local collection systems were identified. In order to investigate the causes of IR in those areas, existing sewer records including engineering plans and CCTV inspection records were reviewed and field investigation including inspection of roof downspout connection and sanitary manholes were carried out. CCTV records showed that most areas have pipes with structural defects including cracks and displaced joints, which are sources of infiltration groundwater. In all seven problem areas, manholes with damaged covers or loose rims were found in low-lying areas that would permit excessive stormwater inflow when submerged during a storm. Other sources of direct inflow in the problem areas include connection to the sanitary sewers of roof leaders and foundation drains. A more detailed description of the problems in each area is provided below. —170— Transnnn nnn arm Wants Committee , COUNCIL — JULY 13, 2004 Infiltration and Inflow Study for Sanitary Sewer Systems Update 4.2.1 Aurora Mark Street Subdivision The Mark Street Subdivision is located northeast of Yonge Street and Wellington Street between Mark Street and Catherine Street (see Attachment. ]).,The area is Rver 50 years old and was constructed using asbestos cement pipes and concrete pipes. Most of the sewers have been replaced with PVC pipes in the last 15 years. CCTV records showed that. most old pipes exhibited structural defects including cracks, broken pipes and displaced joints. The Town of Aurora has an on -going sewer rehabilitation program to carry out sewer lining in the area. Roof leaders of at least 6 homes and foundation drains of approximately 146 homes in the area are connected to the sanitary sewer system. South of Wellington Street This area is located southeast of Yonge Street and Wellington Street between Wellington Street East and Metcalfe Street (see Attachment 1). Conditions in this area are similar to the Mark Street Subdivision, with most of the old asbestos cement and concrete pipes replaced in the last 15 years. CCTV records showed that most old pipes exhibited structural defects including cracks, broken pipes and displaced joints. The Town of Aurora has an on -going sewer rehabilitation program to carry out sewer lining in the area. Roof leaders of at least 4 homes and foundation drains of approximately 286 home in the area are connected to the sanitary sewer system. Major contribution of inflow in the area includes an existing combined sewer, which runs diagonally from Wells Street to Yonge Street (see Attachment 1). 4.2.2 Newmarket Patterson Subdivision Patterson Subdivision is the area located northwest of Davis Drive and Leslie Street. bounded by Huron Heights Drive, Beman Drive, Bayview Parkway and Elgin Street (see Attachment 2). The area is over 25 years old and constructed with concrete pipes. CCTV records showed that most pipes exhibited structural defects including cracks, broken pipes and displaced joints. Roof leaders of at least 30 homes and foundation drains of approximately 415 homes in the area are connected to the sanitary sewer system. —171— f ' CpUNC I L — JULY 13, 2004 ' infiltration and Inflow Study for Sanitary Sewer Systems Update Northwest Area Northwest Area is the area located northeast of Yonge Street and Davis Drive; generally between Bristol Road and London Road (see Attachment 2). The area was constructed in the 1980s with polyvinyl chloride (PVC) pipes. CCTV inspection has not been conducted for this relatively new development. Groundwater in this area is generally high and is one of the main causes of high infiltration in this relatively new area. Roof leaders of at least 20 homes and foundation drains of approximately 752 homes are connected to the sanitary sewer system. w South Part of Core South Part of Core is the area located around Eagle Street between Prospect Street and Sandford Street (see Attachment 2), The area was constructed before 1920 with vitrified clay pipes. Conditions of existing pipes are poor and the Town of Newmarket has an on- going sewer rehabilitation program to carry out sewer lining in the area. Roof leaders of at least 12 homes and foundation drains of approximately 314 homes in the area are connected to the sanitary sewer system. 4.2.3 Richmond Hill Neal Drive Area Neal Drive Area is the area located southwest of Yonge Street and Elgin Mills Road bounded by Bayview Avenue, Taylor Mills Drive, Newkirk Road and Elgin Mills Road (see Attachment 3). The Neal Drive Area was constructed in the 1950s. Most of the pipes in the areas are concrete or clay pipes. CCTV records showed that some pipes exhibited structural defects including cracks, broken pipes and displaced joints. The Town of Richmond Hill has an on -going sewer rehabilitation program to carry out sewer lining in the area. Roof leaders of at least 15 homes and foundation drains of approximately 1,180 homes in the Neal Drive Area are connected to the sanitary sewer system. Crosby Avenue Area Crosby Avenue Area is the area located around Crosby Avenue, immediately southeast of the Neal Drive Area (see Attachment 3). Crosby Avenue Area was constructed in the 1950s with concrete or clay pipes. Pipe conditions in Crosby Avenue Area are very similar to the Neal Avenue Area and the Town of Richmond Hill has also a similar sewer rehabilitation program in the area. Roof leaders of at least 25 homes and foundation drains of approximately 354 homes in the Crosby Avenue area are connected to the sanitary sewer system. —.172— Transporcauon and WorKS Gomminee COUNCIL — JULY 13, 2004 infiltration and Inflow Study for Sanitary Sewer Systems Update 4.3 Remedial Measures Preliminary remedial measures recommended by the consultant include: 1. Implement sewer lining of approximately 8,000 meters of sanitary sewers. .2. Rectify manholes with damaged covers or loose rims in low-lying areas. 3. Disconnect roof leaders to the sanitarysewer system and redirect them to drain directly onto the ground via a splash pad. 4. Develop a program to work with homeowners to disconnect foundation drains to the sanitary sewer system and divert the flows via sump pumps onto the ground. 5. Convert the combined sewer in the South of Wellington Street area into either a sanitary or storm sewer. Details of the remedial measures for each municipality are provided in the Table I below: Table 1 Proposed Remedial Works Aurora Newmarket Richmond Hill Mazk S. of Patterson Northwest South of NealPart Drive Crosby Av Street Wellington Division Area Core Area Area Sewer Lining in areas with on- going 770 670 0 1400 1800 1700 rehabilitation program (metres) Sewer Lining is area without rehabilitation 2000 program (metres) Rectify 5 10 10 20 15 25 20 Manholes (each) Disconnect Roof Leaders 6 4 30 20 12 15 25 (number of homes) Disconnect Foundation Drains 37 72 104 188 8o 295 90 (assuming 25% of homes articioatine) Convert Other Combined Sewer F1 —173— COUNCIL — JULY 13, 2004 f Infiltration and Inflow Study far Sanitary Sewer Systems Update t Lining of sewer pipes is an effective way of reducing infiltration and is alsor required to stop further deterioration of damaged pipes. Presently, the Town of Aurora has an on- going sewer rehabilitation program in both the Mark Street Subdivision and South of Wellington areas. Similarly, the Town of Newmarket has a program for the South Pan of Core area and the Town of Richmond Hill has a program for both the Neal,Drive Area and Crosby Area. The identification of the problem sewers under this study will permit the Towns to focus on these sewers and integrate them as partbf their on -going sewer rehabilitation programs. Rectifying manholes with damaged covers are works that involve only minor costs; however, it could reduce a significant amount of inflow especially for manholes that are located in areas susceptible to flooding. Disconnecting roof leaders from the sanitary system is widely used by most municipalities to reduce III and is a cost effective way of eliminating inflows. manhole disconnection cost is in the range of $2,000 per home. Unlike sewer linino rectification where the works are located within the public rights -of -way, disconnection of roof leaders requires the cooperation of homeowners. While disconnection of foundation drains can reduce III, its cost effectiveness is more difficult to assess. The cost of disconnection varies considerably from home to home, depending on the location of the sump pumps. Disconnection of foundation drains also requires the cooperation of homeowners. Success of the program will depend on the number of homeowners willing to have a sump pump in their homes. Converting the combined sewer in the South of Wellington Street area is essential in reducing I/I, as the sewer carries a significant amount of storm runoff into the sanitary system. Preliminary analysis suggested that the portion of combined sewer north of Mosley Street can be converted into a storm sewer by disconnecting the sanitary connections and re -directing the storm flow to a nearby creek and the portion south of Mosley Street can be converted into a sanitary sewer by disconnecting the storm connections and re -directing the sewage flow to the nearby sanitary sewer system. Further consultation with the Town of Aurora is required to establish the best strategy to deal with the problem. 4.4 Next Steps The I/I Study has successfully identified the seven problem areas and the main sources of I/I, and has recommended a remedial program to reduce I/I. Effective elimination of extraneous flows will now depend on implementing the remedial measures as recommended in the III Study. Accordingly, it is recommended that the Towns be requested to initiate a program to carry out the required remedial works. Transponanon antl Works Commmee onA,a Pnc.1. -174— COUNCIL — JULY 13, 2004 Inflltratlon and Inflow Study for Sanitary Sewer Systems Update M During the course of the study, representatives of the three towns have been invited as a working group to provide input to the study., As the study is now progressing to the initiation of the implementation phase, further co-ordination within the working group is essential in bringing together a sound implementation plan acceptable to all parties including York Region, the municipalities and the homeowners. The reduction of M will reduce treatment cost and free up capacity for growth, thereby deferring the need for infrastructure capacity expansion. Detailed cost and benefit analysis is being carried out by the,consultant pertaining to the potential savings of implementing the proposed works to both the Region and the Towns, Preliminary cost analysis indicates that except for the disconnection of the foundation drains, all the other four remedial measures should be categorized as 'high priority'. For sewer lining, the three towns already have an on -going sewer rehabilitation program in five problem areas and it is anticipated that the Towns will consider integrating the additional sewer lining works recommended in these areas into their programs. Further expansion of the Town of Newmarket program to include the Patterson Subdivision will be needed. Disconnection of roof leaders will require the cooperation of the homeowners. To implement the remedial work, the Towns will first have to prepare a list of homeowners willing to participate in the program. The cost effectiveness of the program can be assessed in detail once the number of participants is identified. Disconnection of foundation drains is being categorized as 'low priority', as the C,.si of foundation drain disconnection is generally high in comparison with its anticipated benefit. Further study may be needed to verify the cost of the program and to determine whethpr this program is worth pursuing. This includes identifying the homeowners who will participate in the program and assessing the disconnection costs for their homes. In the longer term, a program to educate homeowners and promote their awareness of the l/I problems associated with foundation drains is worth considering. With the completion of the cost and benefit analysis, the strategy of implementing both 'high priority' and 'low priority' works in terms of scope and timing will be explored further by the working group. Once the scope and timing of the works are def ncd, the next step is for the Towns to include the, works in their respective capital works program. S, FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS The Region has undertaken the I/1 Study at a cost of $470,931 funded from the Development Charge Reserve and Rate Supported Reserve in the ratio of 80c :nd 20% respectively. It is expected that the study will be completed by the summer of this year. The Towns of Aurora, Newmarket and Richmond Hill will be requested to implement and fund the necessary remedial programs as recommended in the I/I Study. —175— ` COUNCIL — JULY 13, 2004 W' 6 `? ti Infiltration and Inflow Study for Sanitary Sewer Systems Update 6. LOCAL MUNICIPAL IMPACT ` The study carried out by the Region has identified the problem areaswith high infiltration and inflow and has recommended certain remedial works to be implemented. This, enables the Towns of Aurora, Newmarket and Richmond Hill to focus their resources in those areas with high extraneous flow. Eliminating extraneous flow benefits the local municipalities as it frees up sewer capacities for future growth, r 44reliminary cost estimate of the remedial measures is summarized in Table 2 below. Cost for converting the combined sewer in Aurora is not included, as more work is needed to establish the best strategy to deal with the problem. Table 2 Cost Estimate for Remedial Works Aurora Newmarket Richmond Hill High Priority $662,000 Sewer Lining Roof Leader Disconnection $20,000 $124,000 $80,000 Rectify Manholes $7,000 $32,000 $32,000 Sewer Lining (in areas with on- going rehabilitation program by $483,000 $380,000 $1,219,000 the Towns ) __ _ High Priority Total $510,000 $1,198,uuu Low Priority Foundation Drain Disconnection $273,000 $929,000 $963,000 (assuming 25% participation) $783,000 $27127,000 $2,284,000 Grand Total Costs for implementing the `high priority' remedial measures shown in Table 2 total $510,000 for Aurora, $1,198,000 for Newmarket and $1,321,000 for Richmond Hill. Included in these costs are sewer lining works in areas that have already a rehabilitation program in place. The estimated cost for sewer lining works in these areas are $483,000 for Aurora, $380,000 for Newmarket and $1,219,000 for Richmond Hill. Extra fuzCing needed for new programs therefore totals $27,000 for Aurora, $818,000 for Newmarket and $112,000 for Richmond Hill. 'Low priority' work involves mainly the disconnection of foundation drains. Assuming a 25% homeowner participation, the estimated costs total $273,000 for Aurora, $920,000 for Newmarket and $963,000 for Richmond Hill. —176— COUNCIL — JULY 13, 2004 rt, , Infiltration and inflow Study for Sanitary Sewer Systems Update 7. CONCLUSION The Sanitary Sewer Systems Infiltration and Inflow Study conflrme8 that the northern YDSS branch servicing Newmarket, Aurora and Richmond Hill contributes significantly high extraneous flows to the system. Seven problem areas have been identified and the UI Study has recommended a number of remedial measures. Eliminating extraneous flows benefits both the Region and local municipalities and it is essential that therthree municipalities proceed to implement a program to reduce the extraneous flow. The Senior Management Group has reviewed this report. Prepared by: Stephen Fung, P.Eng. Project Manager, Water and Wastewater Planning Reviewed by: Paul May, P.Eng. Director, Infrastructure Planning Recommended by: Kees Schipper, P.Eng. Commissioner of Transportation and Works June 5, 2003 Reviewed by: ~r As raf Hanna, ng. Manager, Water and Wastewater Planning Recommended by: Debbie Korolnek, P.Eng. Director, Water and Wastewater Approved for Ach� Chief Administrauvo vut�ct Attachments 3 SF/gr 1p\pO61200312"'t QunerUune MInfriltration and Inflow Study for Sanitary Sewer Systems Update.doc —177— COUNCIL — JULY 13, 2004 6 COUNCIL ATTACHMENT 1 Inflow and Infiltration Study in Town of Aurora .� missal YDSS Trunk Sewer i�gion N Combined Sewer Problem Area Produced by: 1r Stage 1 Metering Location Infrastructure Planning Branch stage 2 Metering Location Transportation and Works Department —1 78— 4 9 0 Stage 3 Metering Location COUNCIL - JULY 13, 2004 TOWN OF AURORA 2004 CAPITAL BUDGET Appendix B ANALYSIS BY PROJECT DEPARTMENT: Public Works Department PROJECT: Wastewater Infrastructure Rehabilitation Program - Data Collection and Analysis PURPOSE: To collect and analyze condition data for the Town's sanitary sewer infrastructure, to provide the background information necessary for the creation of a overall Sanitaey Sewer Maintenance/Rehabilitation Plan. PERFORMANCE/ACTIVITY MEASURES INCREASE (DECREASE) Essential step in the creation of a long range rehabilitation/maintenance program to ensure the integrity of the Town's sanitary sewer infrastructure, which will result in a reduction in the reactive approach to infrastructure maintenance, and decreased potential liability to Town. EFFECT ON FUTURE OPERATING BUDGETS 2004 2005 2006 INCREASE (DECREASE) SALARIES OTHER COSTS TOTAL PROJECT COST/FINANCING TOTAL PROJECT COST $500,000 $500,000 $500,000 FINANCING: CURRENT LEVY GRANTS RESERVE FUND - (Sewer/Water) $500,000 $500,000 $500,000 OTHER TOTAL FINANCING $500,000 $500,000 $500,000 EXPLANATIONS/HIGHLIGHTS: This is a substantial enhancement of the current program which will utilize both sewer video cameras and visual inspections to provide staff with better knowledge of the existing condition and maintenance requirements for the Town's wastewater collection infrastructure. The results of this project are intended to be consolidated with the results of the companion Storm Drainage Rehabilitation Program - Data Collection and Analysis project to form components of an overall Wastewater and Storm Drain Maintenance and Rehabilitation Program. The program will initially concentrate on the most concerned areas of the Town and move to the newer sections of Town over a number of years. Deferring, reducing, or eliminating this program may result in both customer inconvenience and increased liability claims to the Town due to the lack of knowledge of the wastewater infrastructure's condition. -1lu- LIQUI-FORCE SERVICES 519 322 4606 07/08 '04 10:38 N0.996 01/01 OC(MNOtL 1-v•99J1-Y'J-�341 12ff04 UrCMHIlullJ rwac r Appendix C PART 3 FORM _OF. AGREE.MEN.T THE CORPORATION OF THE TOWN OF AURORA PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT TENDER NO. P.W. 2004.06 THIS AGREEMENT" made (in triplicate) this day of BETWEEN: The Corporation of the'town of Aurora hereinafter called the "OWNER" of the First Part ,and, hereinafter called the "CONTRACTOR" of the Second Part )jYH9 the Tender of the Contractor respecting the constru hereinafter referred to and described, as accepted by the Owner on the day of ". ,, 20-- . THEREFQ8E THIS AGREEMENT WITNESSETH that in cor premises and the covenants hereinafter contained, the Parties hereto a 1, The Contractor hereby covenants and agrees to provide ar Contraotor's own expense, all and every kind of labour, appliances, materials for, and to undertake and complete in strict accordance Document dated Jupe $, Z004 . prepared for the Town of Aur Department, all of which said Documents are annexed hereto and agreement to the some extent as if fully embodied herein at and for th AD 20 work, deration of the go as follows: supply at the equipment, and ith this Tender a Public Works rm part of this pricey or sum of 2. The Contractor further covenants and agrees to undertake and perform the said work in a proper work like manner under the supervision and dire ion and to the complete satisfaction of the Owner within the period of time speoifie in the Form of Tender. 3. The Contractor further covenants and agrees that the Contract( indemnify and save harmless the Owner, the Owners officers, sere from and against all loss or damage, and from and against all actions, demands whatsoever which may be made or brought against the Ov officers, servants, and agents by reason or in consequence of th performance or maintenance of the said work by the Contractor, servants, agents or emplcyees. 17 it will at all times, rnts, and agents suits, claims and mer, the Owners s execution and the Contractor's :H1 COUNCIL - JULY 13, 2004 Ju1107 04 06a20a Mike Near 1-513-662-4600 P.2 4. The Cohtractor further covenants and agrees to furnish in accordance with the above specification, a Performance Bond in an amount equivalent to 100% `bf the contract price for a 5 year period, renewed annually and approved by the Owner's Solicitor, guaranteeing the faithful performance of the said wprk, in accordance with the terms of this Agreement. 5. The OwVier hereby covenants and agrees that if the said work shall be buly and - properly executed and materials provided as aforesaid and if the Contractor shall carry out, perform and observe all of the requirement,% and conditions of Oils agreement, the Owner will pay'! the Contractor the contract price herein set forth in the Contractors Tender, such prf yment or payments to be made in accordance with the provisions of ih&: General Conditions of the Contract referred to abo oe. 6. This agreement and everything herein contained shall ensure to the benefff of and be binding 'pon the Parties hereto, their successors and assigns, respectively. 7. All com6unications in writing between the parties or between them and the Engineer shall deemed to have been received by the addresses if deUvered to the Individual or to 0 member of the firm or to an officer of the Corporation for whom they are intended or' sent by post, telegram or facsimile ,addressed as follows: TWE OWNER: CORPORATION OF THE TOWN OF AURORA 100 John Wt:ist Way P.O. Box 1000 Aurora, Ontario LAG 8J1 -teFLAX: 906-841-7119 Cr THE CONTRACTOR: L1j— ;(c{' ryill�4, rib/ Inc. a�1S -�ph-ks Drivel R # ;L KI'A 4PLj I lk o� rA�ld N1 FAX: .3riq 3a4-"1406 IN WITNESS Aj_fHEREQF the parties hereto have hereunto affixed their corporate seals duly attested by the hands of their proper officers in that jehalf respectively. i CONTRACTOR OWNER i I ' I 1 j J' cwiJ � ;-9�irlonf Mayor, T. Jones Clerk, Bob Panizza, A.M.C.T. COUNCIL — JULY 13, 2004 AGENDA ITEM # I O TOWN OF AURORA COUNCIL REPORT No. PW04-030 SUBJECT: Safe Drinking Water Act FROM: W. H. Jackson, Director of Public Works DATE: July 13, 2004 RECOMMENDATIONS THAT Report No. PW04-030 entitled "Safe Drinking Water Act" be received for information; THAT Council designate: • the position of Manager of Operations Services as the Overall Responsible Operator; and • the positions of Public Works Supervisor (Water/Wastewater), Public Works Supervisor(Roads/Traffic), and Managerof Operations Services as Operators - in -Charge. THAT the Overall Responsible Operator and the Director of Public Works be authorized to designate an Overall Responsible Operatorto actin the absence ofthe Manger of Operations Services; THAT Council recognize the Public Works Supervisor (Water/Wastewater) as the primary Operator -in -Charge and that the Overall Responsible Operator and the Director of Public Works be authorized to designate Pubic Works Crew Leaders as Operators -in -Charge as required in the absence of the Public Works Supervisors; THAT staff be directed to report further on the matter of the operation of the Town's waterand sewage systems as necessary ores additional Provincial regulations are enacted; and THAT Bylaw No. 4567-04.H be enacted. BACKGROUND One of the recommendations contained within Commissioner O'Connor's May 2002 "Report of the Walkerton Inquiry — Part Two" was that: "the provincial government should enact a Safe Drinking Water Act to deal with matters related to the treatment and distribution of drinking water". —182— COUNCIL — JULY 13, 2004 July 13, 2004 - 2 - Report No. PW04-030 The Safe Drinking Water Act was assented to December 13, 2002 and provides legislative authority to implement 50 (of a total of 93) recommendations from Commissioner O'Connor Part Two report and 14 (of a total of 28) recommendations from his Part One report. To date, a number of regulations have been made under the Safe Drinking Water Act that provide greater clarity and direction with respect to operation and reporting regimes for drinking water systems. In addition, under the Water Resources Act, a regulation has been passed which deals with the certification and training of operators. COMMENTS The purposes of the Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA) as stated in the Act are: 1. To recognize that the people of Ontario are entitled to expect their drinking water to be safe; and 2. To provide for the protection of human health and the prevention of drinking -water health hazards through the control and regulation of drinking -water systems and drinking -water testing. The SDWA and its Regulations (see Appendix "A" for list of Regulations) set out a number of parameters for the operations and maintenance of the Town's drinking -water system. The main areas of concern are listed below and discussed in more detail in the ensuing sections of this report. • Categories of municipal drinking water systems; • Duties of owners (Standard of care); • Reporting of adverse test results; • Approvals required to modify system; • Testing; • Inspections, compliance, enforcement and offences; • Quality standards; and • Operator certificates. 1. Categories of Municipal Drinking Water Systems Regulation 170/03 sets out four categories of municipal drinking water systems (small and large systems serving a residential population, and small and large non-residential systems servicing, for example, community centres and town halls). Each category has specific requirements that must be met. —183— COUNCIL — JULY 13, 2004 13, 2004 -3- The Town of Aurora's system is classified as Report No. PW04-030 "Large Municipal Residential System" because our system serves a major residential development and serves more than 100 private residences. Within this category, we are a water distribution subsystem (collection subsystem for sewage) at a Level II Class (or Class II). 2. Duties of Owners (Standard of Care) The SDWA places the recommended statutory standard of care on those who have oversight of municipal drinking- water systems, which would include Town Council. Each person must exercise the level of care, diligence and skill in respect of a municipal drinking -water system that a reasonably prudent person would be expected to exercise in a similar situation. They also must act honestly, competently and with integrity, with a view to ensuring.the protection and safety of the users of the municipal drinking -water system. A person may rely in good faith on a report of an engineer, lawyer, accountant or other person whose professional qualifications lend credibility to the report. It is noted that statutory standards of care already exist in other Ontario legislation. For example, both the Environmental Protection Act and Ontario Water Resources Act contain provisions in which every director or officer of a corporation has a duty to take all reasonable care to prevent the corporation from causing or permitting the discharge of a contaminant into the natural environment or waters. Every person who has this duty and who fails to carry out that duty is guilty of an offence. Nevertheless, at this point, the "standard of care" referred to in the SDWA has not, as yet, been supported by corresponding regulations. The Province is preparing guidance on this matter to meet the needs of municipal officials and accordingly, Council should expect a further report on this issue when the Provincial information is available. 3. Reporting of Adverse Test Results Any test results that exceed any of the standards in Schedule 1 (Microbiological Standards), Schedule 2 (Chemical Standards — except for fluoride) or Schedule 3 (Radiological Standards) in Regulation 169/03 must be reported verbally and in writing to both the local Medical Officer of Health and the Ministry of the Environment. Under the Town's existing protocol, the laboratory that tests all of our samples (the "York - Durham Regional Environmental Laboratory" which is a fully licensed laboratory) reports any adverse sample results to the York Regional Medical Officer of Health, the Ministry of the Environment and designated Town staff almost simultaneously. The Town's operating procedures then provide for the appropriate reaction including communication with the Medical Officer of Health for guidance and direction as appropriate. —184— COUNCIL — JULY 13, 2004 July 13. 2004 - 4 - Report No. PW04-030 Ultimately, all test results are reported in an open document available on the Town's web site. The present requirement is for this report to be produced annually. 4. Approvals Required to Modify System Approval under the SDWA is required for any new or replacement/alteration of a municipal drinking -water system. This approval requires a submission to the Ministry of the Environment (in our case, the submission is to the Region of York because they have been delegated authority to recommend approval to the Ministry) supported by detailed plans and background studies. It is noted that a similar clause has existed in the Water Resources Act since 1990 and accordingly, this section of the SDWA presents no major challenges or process changes to the Town. 5. Testing The drinking -water quality standards to be tested for are as set out in the appropriate schedules of Regulation 169/03 covering microbiological, chemical and radiological compliance levels. Compliance consists of meeting the stated standards or, if in circumstances where the water does not meet the standard (i.e. an "adverse test"), the Town: • immediately contacts the Medical Officer of Health and takes such other steps as are directed by the Medical Officer of Health; and • ensures that the appropriate corrective. action as stated in Schedule 17 of Regulation 170/03 is taken. As noted in Section 3 above, notification of the York Region Medical Officer of Health is the first step when an adverse test is encountered and the Town's existing operating procedures mirror the corrective actions required under Schedule 17 of Regulation 170/03. 6. Inspections, Compliance, Enforcement and Offences The SDWA contains a number of broad inspection powers that closely resemble provisions found in other environmental statures such as the Water Resources Act and the Environmental Protection Act. To assist in this aspect of the SDWA, the Ministry of the Environment has dramatically increased its Inspections staff. Provincial officers may conduct inspections under the SDWA without a warrant or court order to determine a person's compliance with the Act or regulations. During such inspections, provincial officers have a wide-ranging authority including powers for such actions as: • entering into or on any part of the natural environment, or any place where a —185— COUNCIL — JULY 13, 2004 July 13, 2004 - 5 - Report No. PW04-030 drinking -water system, plumbing or SDWA documentation is located; • taking samples, conducting tests, taking measurements or making excavations; • requiring production of documents, and examination, coping or recording any document; • taking photographs, videotaping or other visual recordings; • requesting assistance from experts, police officers, municipal employees, or employees of the Ontario Clean Water Agency; • stopping and searching vehicles and vessels; • administering other environmental statutes while engaged in SDWA inspections; • entering dwelling with judicial authorizations; • prohibiting entry into any place; • securing land or other places or things by locks, gates, fences or guards; • detaining or removing things found during warrantless searches; and • placing any substance or tracking device on any land, place orthing for investigative purposes. It should be noted that before the section (Part VI II) of the SDWA that contains the above powers comes into force, the Minister is statutorily obliged to make a "compliance" regulation that specifies: • the frequency of inspections, and the actions required and response time in the event of a deficiency; and • procedures and protocols for investigations and enforcement, including procedures to be followed to respond to a request form the public for an investigation of an alleged offence under the SDWA. We are awaiting this "compliance" regulation although Ministry inspections continue. The SDWA also provides statutory authority for a wide variety of administrative orders and enforcement mechanisms to ensure compliance under the Act. Generally, these orders and mechanisms are similar to those found under the Water Resources Act and the Environmental Protection Act. The SDWA establishes a number of prohibitions and penalties under the Act such as the COUNCIL — JULY 13, 2004 July 13, 2004 - 6 - Report No. PW04-030 prohibition from hindering or obstructing provincial officers, Ministry of the Environment employees, or employees of the Ontario Clean Water Agency who are performing their duties under the SDWA. Submitting false information or refusing to furnish information is also prohibited. Persons are guilty of offences under the SDWA if they contravene specified provision of the Act or SDWA regulations, orders, conditions of certificates, permits, approvals or licences. Corporate officers and directors are also subject to prosecution under the SDWA. For individuals convicted under the SDWA, the maximum fines payable range between $20,000 and $7 million, depending on the nature of the offence. Imprisonment may also be imposed upon convicted individuals. For corporations convicted under the SDWA, the maximum fines payable range between $100,000 and $10 million, depending on the nature of the offence. 7. Quality Standards Under the SDWA, the term "drinking -water" means: • water intended for human consumption; or • water that is required by an Act, regulation, order, municipal by-law or other document issued under the authority of the Act: 1. to be potable, or. 2. to meet or exceed the requirements of the prescribed drinking- water quality standards. The drinking -water quality standards are prescribed in Regulation 169/03. As noted earlier, that regulation contains three schedules setting "microbiological standards" (Schedule 1), "chemical standards" (Schedule 2) and "radiological standards" (Schedule 3). All of our efforts and testing are oriented toward ensuring the Town's water supply meets these standards. 8. Operator Certificates There are two Regulations that deal with the requirement for operator certificates. Regulation 128/04 talks to the drinking -water system while Regulation 129104 deals with licensing of sewage works operators. Both of these regulations were filed on May 14, 2004 and come into effect on August 1, 2004. Aurora does not have separate operating groups for water and sewage and accordingly, both of these regulations apply to each person working on our system. —187— COUNCIL — JULY 13, 2004 July 13, 2004 - 7 - Report No. PW04-030 Both regulations require certified people to operate the Town's water and sewage systems. The regulations prescribe minimal education requirements, experience and examination results specific to each Certification Class (Operators -in -Training and Operator Class 1, 11, III, IV). In addition to the above, each Operator must undertake prescribed training requirements dependant on specific classes. For example, a Class II Water Distribution Operator must undergo 12 hours or more annually of continuing education with an additional minimum of 23 hours per year of on-the-job practical training. A Class I I Sewage Distribution Operator must undergo 40 hours of general training over a three-year period. Previously it was noted that Aurora's system is defined as a Large Municipal Residential System and within this category, we are a water distribution subsystem (collection subsystem for sewage) at a Level II Class. Under the regulations, anybody (an "Operator") working on our water or sewage system must have a minimum Class I certification except for "Overall Responsible Operators" and "Operators -in -Charge" who must have a Class 11 Certification. Under the above noted regulations, system owners are required to designate an operator as an "overall responsible operator" and one or more operators as. "operators -in -charge". The duties of an overall responsible operator are not specified in the regulations although inference can be made from the title. Under the regulations however, an "operator -in -charge" is authorized to set operational parameters for the subsystem or for a process that controls the effectiveness or efficiency of the subsystem; and • direct or instruct other operators in the subsystem to set such operational parameters. The "operator -in -charge" is also charged with: • taking all steps reasonably necessary to operate the processes within his or her responsibility in a safe and efficient manner in accordance with the relevant operations manuals; • ensuring that the processes within his or her responsibility are measured, monitored, sampled and tested in a manner,that permits them to be adjusted when necessary; • ensuring that records are maintained of all adjustments made to the processes within his or her responsibility; and ensuring that all equipment used in the processes within his or her responsibility is properly monitored, inspected, tested and evaluated and that records of equipment operating status are prepared and available at the end of every operating shift. COUNCIL — JULY 13, 2004 July 13, 2004 - 8 - Report No. PW04-030 Based on our existing organizational structure, the most appropriate arrangement would be to. designate the position of Manager of Operations Services as the Overall Responsible Operator. Both the Manager of Operations Services and the Director of Public Works should be authorized to designate somebody else as Overall Responsible Operator in the absence of the Manager of Operations Services. The positions of Manager of Operations Services, Public Works Supervisor (Water/Wastewater) and Public Works Supervisor (Roads/Traffic) should be designated as Operators -in -Charge with the Public Works Supervisor (Water/Wastewater) as the primary Operator -in -charge.. It would be prudent also, it is believed, if Council authorized the Overall Responsible Operator and the Director of Pubic Works to designate Public Works Crew Leaders as Operators -in -Charge. The Public Works Crew Leaders would be assigned Operator -in - Charge duties as necessary to ensure appropriate coverage during vacation times, shift times and also as a succession planning tool. OPTIONS With respect to the designation of Overall Responsible Operator and Operator -in -Charge, the options are limited. The applicable regulations were filed on May 14, 2004 and the specific sections related to these designations come into force on August 1, 2004. The only other Town employees eligible to be so designated at this time are those of the unionised group outside of the Crew Leaders who hold the appropriate certifications. With respect to the other matters discussed in this report, the options available are mostly based on the ownership of the system. Under the SDWA, an owner of a drinking -water system (the Town) may enter into an agreement with an accredited operating authority and, in the agreement, delegate a duty imposed on the owner under the SDWA to the accredited operating authority. However, this delegation does not relieve the owner of the drinking -water system from ensuring the accredited operating authority carries out its duties under the SDWA and takes all reasonable steps to ensure that the operation of the system complies with the requirements of the Act. In addition, this delegation does not relieve the owner of the standard of care duties as listed earlier in this report. Over the last year, staff has been involved with Regional and other local municipal staff in a review of water and wastewater service delivery options. A report on this issue was expected in May/June of this year but has been delayed, unfortunately, because of the sewage capacity concern that arose at about that time. Once the delivery options report is tabled, Council may find there are other options to operating our water distribution and waste collections systems that you wish to explore. FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS There is already a systematic system of training and upgrading of our water and sewage aff- E COUNCIL — JULY 13, 2004 July 13, 2004 - 9 - Report No. PW04-030 personal that has been in place for some years. The requirements of the SDWA, Water Resources Act and associated regulations will not increase the required budget dramatically. Although the Province has increased the fees associated with the Certification program, this is not a significant increase and we still expect our training and certification budget to be in the order of $15,000 per year similar to this year's budget. All costs are covered by the self-supporting water and sewer accounts. CONCLUSIONS. The Safe Drinking Water Act, Water Resources Act and their associated regulations present owners and operators with a body of legislation that goes a long way toward implementing the recommendations of the Walkerton Inquiry. Specifically with regard to the Town of Aurora, much of the requirements are not new. Testing, reporting and operating in an efficient and effective manner have always been part of our procedures. There are more specific training and certification requirements under the new regulations although it is not seen as an excessive burden for us to meet these standards. In summary, at present, Aurora is in complete compliance with all requirements. All staff working on the drinking -water system have the appropriate certification and expertise. All of the appropriate sampling and operational checks are complied with and appropriate reporting processes have been established. LINK TO STRATEGIC PLAN Goal A - To Maintain A Well Managed And Fiscally Responsible Municipality ATTACHMENTS • Appendix "A" —List of Regulations Made Under the Safe Drinking Water Act PRE -SUBMISSION REVIEW Management Team Meeting — July 7, 2004 Prepared by. W, H. Jackson, Ext. 4379 W. H. Jackso Director of Publr Works —190— COUNCIL — JULY 13, 2004 July 13, 2004 - 10 - Report No. PW04-030 Appendix "A" Regulations Made Under the Safe Drinking Water Act Ontario Regulation 128/04 — Certification of Drinking -Water System Operators and Water Quality Analysts Ontario Regulation 129/04 — Licensing of Sewage Works Operators (Enacted under the Water Resources Act) Ontario Regulation 169103 — Drinking Water Quality Standards • Amended by Ontario Regulation 268/03 Ontario Regulation 170/03 — Drinking Water Systems Regulation Amended by Ontario Regulation 249/03 and 269/03 Ontario Regulation 171/03 — Definitions of Works and Expressions Used in the Act • Amended by Ontario Regulation 270/03 Ontario Regulation 172/03 — Definition of Deficiency and Municipal Drinking Water System Ontario Regulation 173/03 — School, Private Schools and Day Nurseries Ontario Regulation 248103 — Drinking Water Testing Services (Relating to Laboratory Licensing)' —191— COUNCIL - JULY 13, 2004 AGENDA ITEM # I TOWN OF AURORA COUNCIL REPORT SUBJECT: Winter Road Maintenance Service Delivery Options FROM: W. H. Jackson, Director of Public Works DATE: July 13, 2004 RECOMMENDATIONS No. PW04-031 THAT Council direct staff to prepare and issue tenders to commence this 200412005 winter season for the: 1. Supply and delivery of 3, 4, 5, 7 or 8 contracted de-icing/plow trucks; and 2. Plowing and optional sanding/salting of the Town's 3 commercial parking lots. THAT staff be requested to provide a further update report for Council's consideration regarding the winter road maintenance service delivery options and labour implications after the tenders have been reviewed. BACKGROUND Council, at its meeting of January 28, 2003, in considering a report on the impact of the Employment Standards Act on the Town's winter maintenance program passed, among other matters, the following resolution: "THAT Council direct staff to prepare a further report after the 200312004 winter season for their consideration outlining long term strategies and options for future winter seasons." COMMENTS 1.0 2003/2004 Winter Road Maintenance Program Details The following sections provide a quick overview of the 2003/2004 Public Works winter road operation. For simplicity, the sidewalk operation is not included in this report because Council at its meeting of June 24, 2003 authorized a three-year extension of our contract with Nu -Con Contracting to supply and operate tractors with de-icing/plow/blower attachments for winter -192- COUNCIL - JULY 13, 2004 July 13, 2004 -2- Report No. PW04-031 sidewalk maintenance. Included in this contract extension was the provision of additional sidewalk tractors so that we can deal with the new growth related sidewalks in Town. 1.1 Staff/Equipment Resources The Department's winter staffing/equipment resources consisted of: • 13 full time employees; • 4 seasonal employees (i.e. replacing 2 full time vacancies); • 2 full time Mechanics; and • 8 dump trucks with sander/plow/wing attachments. Staff was assigned 4 shifts during the weekdays, supplemented by standby assignments during weekends and statutory holidays. 1.2 Program The Department's winter road maintenance program was based on 7 salt/sand/plow routes, 4 of which were done by Public Works forces and the remaining 3 routes by a private contractor. In addition, a private contractor plowed the Town's 3 commercial parking lots and Public Works staff sanded/salted these parking lots. During November (before the contract started) and April (after the contract ended for the season), Public Works trucks and staff are assigned to the 7 routes. From December to March, Public Works allocation is reduced to 4 assigned routes, with 1 truck reassigned to the Parks Division for their use, thereby leaving the Department with 3 spare trucks available for use as replacement due to unscheduled repairs and sewer/water infrastructure maintenance. All response and completion times were based on the revised standards approved by Council on June 24, 2003. 2.0 Considerations for the 2004/2005 Season As the Department is preparing for the upcoming 2004/2005 winter season, it is faced with several considerations that will have a major impact on how winter road maintenance services are to be delivered and their subsequent costs. These considerations are described in more detail below. 2.1 Contracts The 3-year contract with Diamond Landscaping to plow the 3 commercial parking lots expired April 2004. A new contract to undertake this work will need to be tendered shortly. -193- COUNCIL — JULY 13, 2004 July 13, 2004 -3- Report No PW04-031 The contract with Armitage Construction forthe salting/sanding/plowing of 3 routes also expired April 2004. This was originally a 3-year contract that was extended for an additional year at the Town's wish. A new contract must be tendered shortly with decisions required on the total number of routes and how many of these routes will be contracted. Further discussion on these issues is undertaken below. Over the years, it has been found to be beneficial to use a combination of contracted and in-house staff and equipment. The knowledge of the in-house staff is balanced by the contractor's ability to provide additional equipment and drivers during peak demand periods. 2.2 Routes The Province's Minimum Highway Maintenance Standards introduced in late 2002 and adopted by Council at its meeting of December 17, 2002 provide municipalities with base service levels for various road maintenance activities. Although these standards are not obligatory, they provide municipalities with a defence for minimum statutory care should there be any insurance claims or legal action brought forward. Last winter 7 routes were required to maintain these minimum levels. This winter, in consideration of the additional roads that must be maintained in the areas east of Bayview Avenue together with the St. John's Sideroad/Bathurst Street and St. John's Sideroad/Gateway Drive areas, an additional route will be required to maintain the minimum maintenance standards. 2.3 Labour Uncertainty Outside Public Works staff (along with their Leisure Services counterparts) are represented by CUPE Local 905, Aurora Unit, and are currently in a contract dispute with the Town. The Collective Agreement with CUPE expired March 31, 2004 and subsequent conciliation was unsuccessful. At this time, therefore, CUPE is in a legal strike position and the Town is in a legal lockout position. A "handshake" arrangement has been brokered such that each side will give the other 48 hours notice if there is an intention to implement either a strike or lockout. Public Works staff has always played an important and major role in the Department's winter operations. Any reduced involvement by these employees will necessitate an increase in the use of contracted resources. 3. Discussion With respect to the number of routes, the option exists to maintain our existing 7 routes with the resultant drop in level of service to below the minimum standards. This is a risk —194— COUNCIL — JULY 13, 2004 July 13, 2004 - 4 - Report No. PW04-031 management decision inasmuch as an available liability defence is lost if the minimum standards are not maintained. Additionally, it is a political decision because the timeliness of snow clearing is typically a sensitive issue with residents. A properly crafted tender will provide the information necessary to allow staff to compare the costs of maintaining 7 routes versus adding an additional route. With respect to the ratio of routes serviced by contracted versus in-house staff, there are a number of issues to consider. Certainty of staff is obviously of critical importance. Although we expect the current labour unrest will ultimately be resolved, because of the large investment in equipment and the need to make commitments to their staff, contractors typically look for winter service contracts to be in the order of 3 to 5 years. Anything less than this could have excessive cost implications as the contractors write off their equipment over a shorter time and weigh the disadvantage of having to re -tender in one or two years. Accordingly, a decision made on this matter in 2004 will be in effect into, at least, the 2007/2008 winter season. Decisions to reduce the number of routes operated by in-house staff will also have other implications with respect to the number of staff and pieces of equipment the Town will ultimately need. These decisions cannot be made without cost information and therefore, it is suggested that a tender be issued that not only asks for the supply and operation of 3-5 trucks (as per our existing tender) but also requests the supply and operation of an number of alternative quantities of trucks. With this information, staff will be in a better position to present Council with the costs and staffing implications of the various alternatives. OPTIONS Council may direct staff to pursue only one particular alternative (i.e. 5 contracted routes and 3 in-house routes). FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS The existing winter roads budget for contracted services is $190,000. This includes contracted snow plowing, sanding and salting for the municipal roads and commercial parking lots as well as the provision of the weather radar system and spring street sweeping. The road snow -clearing portion of this budget is $115,000 within which provision for one additional contractor truck for the month of December has been made. The above prices do not include provision for increased unit prices. Based on a review and averaging of other area municipal costs and past discussions with our current contractor, we expect unit prices to increase a minimum of 30% for our new contract. —195— COUNCIL - JULY 13, 2004 July 13, 2004 - 5 - Report No. PW04-031 The unit price increase plus increases related to some of the options being explored such as the addition of a route, greater use of contracted services and standby period adjustments could result in significant cost increases for this upcoming winter. These increased costs may be offset by reduced Department staffing and equipment costs and accordingly, until tender costs are received, staff is unable to accurately comment on the overall financial impact on the 2004 and 2005 Department budgets. CONCLUSIONS The current labour uncertainty between the Town and CUPE Local 905 has compelled staff to review how winter road maintenance services can be delivered with minimal disruption and increased costs. if Town staff is not available. The object is to minimize both the disruption and cost increases however, the Department's winter program commences in November and accordingly, it is important to issue the tender as soon as possible and update Council further on this matter. LINK TO STRATEGIC PLAN Goal A - To Maintain A Well Managed And Fiscally Responsible Municipality is identified as a complimentary link to this report and is supported by Long Term Strategy No. 6 - Reviewing practices for the contracting out of services if such processes can result in obtaining efficiencies and monetary savings. ATTACHMENTS None. PRE -SUBMISSION REVIEW Management Team Meeting - July 7, 2004 Prepared by. Ken Lauppe, Manager of Operations Services, Ext. 3442 W. H. Jaek96-W Director of Public Works -196- COUNCIL - JULY 13, 2004 AGENDA ITEM � I TOWN OF AURORA ------ COUNCIL REPORT No. PW04-032 SUBJECT: Agreement with Hydro One Networks Inc. for Streetlights along Bayview Avenue between Wellington Street and St. John's Sideroad FROM: W. H. Jackson, Director of Public Works DATE: July 13, 2004 RECOMMENDATIONS THAT Council authorize the Director of Public Works: • to sign the attached Agreement for Licensed Occupancy of Power Utility Poles between the Town of Aurora and Hydro One Networks Inc. for the installation of streetlights on Hydro One poles along Bayview Avenue; and • to enter into new Occupancy Agreements with Hydro One Networks Inc. that may become necessary in the future. BACKGROUND As part of the reconstruction of Bayview Avenue from Wellington Street to St. John's Sideroad, Town owned streetlights will be installed. On the east side of the street, the new streetlights will consist of complete new poles and lights. On the west side of the street, the streetlights will be installed on the existing Hydro One pole line. Hydro One requires an executed "Agreement for Licensed Occupancy of Power Utility Poles" before they will allow the installation of the proposed streetlights on their poles. COMMENTS The attached agreement is the standard form that Hydro One uses for all municipalities and utilities wishing to install their plant on Hydro One poles. The Agreement specifies: • A 1-year term with automatic renewals and no limit on the number of times the Agreement can be renewed; • A charge of $2.04 per year per attachment amounting to $53.04 per year for Bayview Avenue; -197- COUNCIL — JULY 13, 2004 July 13, 2004 - 2 - Report No. PW04-032 Town maintained insurance coverage of $5M; and • Town responsibility for all streetlight operation and maintenance costs. Staff met with Hydro One staff to discuss the terms of the Agreement and get clarification of some items specific to our project. Hydro One staff indicated that this is a standard form document they use with all municipalities who wish to attach any type of apparatus or equipment to a Hydro One pole. This equipment can include streetlights, traffic signals, decorative lights, banners, and seasonal decorations. Hydro One has previously entered into the same form of Agreement with many municipalities in Ontario who have attachments on Hydro One poles. OPTIONS There are no practical alternatives. The road right-of-way width will not allow a second pole line to be established along the west side of Bayview Avenue. Even if room were available, the cost forthe new poles (>$50,000) compared to the annual cost of $53 to attach to the Hydro One poles would not make economic sense. FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS The cost per year for the streetlights covered in this agreement amounts to $2.04 per attachment per year or $53.04/year for the 26 streetlights that are to be installed on Hydro One poles. There is a provision in the Agreement .for an annual adjustment in the yearly cost although, it was pointed out to us by Hydro One staff that this provision has not been applied for at least 15 years. CONCLUSIONS To properly illuminate the new sidewalks, bikeway and roadway thatwill be installed during the reconstruction of Bayview Avenue, streetlights are required on both sides of the street. On the east side new poles and light fixtures will be required. On the west side, using the existing Hydro One pole line is the most efficient and cost effective solution. To implement this solution, the Town must enter into the attached agreement with Hydro One to allow attachment of the streetlights on Bayview Avenue to be installed on their poles. LINK TO STRATEGIC PLAN Goal "A" speaks to maintaining a well -managed and fiscally responsible municipality. COUNCIL - JULY 13, 2004 July 13, 2004 - 3 - Report No. PW04-032 ATTACHMENTS • Appendix "A" -Occupancy Agreement PRE -SUBMISSION REVIEW Management Team Meeting - July 7, 2004 Prepared by. David Atkins, Manager of Engineering Services, Ext. 4382 W. H. JgOW64 Director of Public Works -199- COUNCIL — JULY 13, 2004 APPENDIX "A" THIS AGREEMENT FOR LICENSED OCCUPANCY OF POWER UTILITY DISTRIBUTION POLES made in duplicate this _ day of , BETWEEN: HYDRO ONE NETWORKS INC., a corporation incorporated pursuant to the laws of the Province of Ontario (hereinafter referred to as "HONetworks") OF THE FIRST PART, THE CORPORATION OF THE TOWN OF AURORA (hereinafter referred to as the "Licensee") OF THE SECOND PART. WHEREAS the Licensee wishes to place, affix or attach or continue to place affix or attach, as the case may be, Attachments (as defined in Section 1.0 herein) to poles owned by HONetworks and HONetworks is agreeable to granting such license to the Licensee for said purpose and upon the terms and conditions as herein contained (hereinafter referred to as the "Licence"); AND WHEREAS the parties acknowledge that the Licence shall be of mutual advantage and shall provide an environment that maximizes the efficiencies and effectiveness of Joint Use (as defined in Section 1.0 herein) to better serve the parties' respective customers; AND WHEREAS the parties agree to deal with each other with due consideration for the safety of their respective employees, agents and contractors and the preservation of each other's property and assets and the interests of their respective customers; AND WHEREAS the parties shall encourage open and effective communication between all Joint Use Pole users regarding joint planning for the use of such Joint Use Poles (as defined in Section 1.0 herein); and AND WHEREAS both parties acknowledge that safety shall be of paramount importance in the joint planning, design, placement, maintenance and removal of Attachments on or along the Joint Use Poles. NOW THEREFORE in consideration of the terms and conditions contained herein and other good and valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which is hereby irrevocably acknowledged, the parties hereto agree as follows: —200— COUNCIL — JULY 13, 2004 TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.0 Definitions...............................................................................................................3 2.0 Term........................................................................................................................ 5 3.0 Contract Administration Guide............................................................................... 6 4.0 Application for Joint Use and Grant of Licence......................................................6 5.0 Installation, Maintenance and Operation of Joint Use Poles .................................. 6 6.0 Installation, Maintenance and Operation of Attachments.......................................7 7.0 Performance Guarantee........................................................................................... 8 8.0 Right of Way........................................................................................................... 8 9.0 Safety and Compliance With Applicable Law ........................................................ 9 10.0 Pole Rental Rates..................................................................................................10 11.0 Division of Costs...................................................................................................11 12.0 Unauthorized Attachments....................................................................................11 13.0 Existing Rights of Others......................................................................................11 14.0 Liability, Damage and Indemnification.................................................................12 15.0 Dispute Resolution................................................................................................12 16.0 Insurance............................................................................................................... 13 17.0 Termination...........................................................................................................13 18.0 Failure to Comply and Late Payment....................................................................14 19.0 Force Majeure............. :.......................................................................................... 15 20.0 Relationship of Parties..........................................................................................15 21.0 Notice....................................................................................................................15 22.0 Non-Assignment....................................................................................................16 23.0 Entire Agreement.................................................................................................. 16 24.0 Amendments..........................................................................................................17 25.0 Severability............................................................................................................17 26.0 Other Information.................................................................................................. 17 27.0 Counterparts..........................................................................................................17 28.0 Reasonableness......................................................................................................17 29.0 Applicable Law.....................................................................................................17 2 —201— COUNCIL - JULY 13, 2004 1.0 DEFINITIONS: The terms defined in this Section for the purposes of the provisions herein and the Contract Administration Guide for Road Authorities (hereinafter referred to as the "CAG" and attached hereto as Schedule "A"), shall have the following meanings unless the context expressly or by necessary implication otherwise requires: "Application" means the form attached hereto as Schedule 'B", the format of which may be revised from time to time by HONetworks at its discretion, to be completed and submitted to HONetworks by the Licensee when the Licensee wishes to place its attachments on HONetworks' poles in accordance with the terms and conditions of this Licence. "Approval" means the execution of the Application by HONetworks in accordance with the terms and conditions of this Licence, such that the Licensee may attach its Attachments, as specified in the Application to the Joint Use Poles, to other equipment or In -Span. "Attachment(s)" means any material, apparatus, equipment or facility owned, in full or in part by the Licensee and attached to, either by being carried on or supported by, the poles of HONetworks, with the exception of equipment to provide Telecommunication Services (as hereafter defined). Without limiting the generality of the foregoing, Attachments may include: - mast arms, luminaires, supply conductors, relays and other equipment required to operate a street lighting system - traffic signal, power and control cables, junction and splice boxes and any other equipment and/or devices normally required for the operation of traffic signals - service attachments - decorative lighting - standards - seasonal decorations. . For the purpose of this Agreement, Attachment(s) does not include any material, apparatus, equipment or facility owned by the Licensee for the provision of Telecommunication Services and all such attachments shall require a separate Licence. "Contract Administration Guide" or "CAG" means the administrative and operating practices and processes outlined in Schedule "A" attached hereto. "Emergency" means a situation in which there is a risk of bodily injury or death or an imminent or existing interruption of power or service to customers. "Good Utility Practice" means any of the practices, methods and acts engaged in or approved by a significant portion of the electric utility industry in North America during the relevant time period, or any of the practices, methods and acts which, in the exercise of reasonable judgement in light of the facts known at the time the decision was made, 3 —202— COUNCIL — JULY 13, 2004 could have been expected to accomplish the desired result at a reasonable cost consistent with good business practices, reliability, safety and expedition. Good Utility Practice is not intended to be limited to the optimum practice, method or act to the exclusion of all others, but rather to be acceptable practices, methods, or acts generally accepted in North America. "Hazardous Condition" means a structural/mechanical or electrical condition that has the potential to cause harm or injury to persons or property and which requires specific work methods until the condition is removed. "HONetworks' Costs" means the actual charges for labour, materials and equipment plus the applicable overheads. "Inter -Spaced Pole" means a Pole(s) that has been added between existing Pole(s). "In -Span" means a position between poles. "Joint Use" means the use or intended use of a Pole to support the Attachments of authorized parties, including parties other than the Licensee which have Joint Use of Pole Licenses with HONetworks. "Joint Use Pole(s)" means a pole(s) owned by HONetworks that supports, or is intended to support, Attachments of other parties, including the Licensee and includes any pole(s) installed at the request of the Licensee. "Licence" means this Agreement and shall include the Schedules "A", and "B" attached hereto, which are to be read with and form part of this Licence. "Limits of Approach" means the minimum distance that must be maintained between personnel and/or equipment and exposed live electrical apparatus in order to work safely as provided in the Occupational Health and Safety Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. 0.1, as amended and/or Part 11 of the Canada Labour Code, R.S.C. 1985, c.L.2, as amended, and all applicable regulations thereto. "Line Clearing" means the provision of adequate clearance from tree interference for all Attachments carried on, to, or supported by Joint Use Poles, and includes underbrushing, tree removal, pruning or trimming, treatment of cuts, application of herbicidal sprays and disposal of debris. "Make-ready Work" means work that is necessary and required solely for the purpose of directly accommodating the Attachment(s) that the Licensee wishes to attach to HONetworks' pole(s) and includes, but is not limited to, initial Line Clearing, any changes or additions to or rearrangement of HONetworks' poles or HONetworks' attachments. Without restricting the generality of the foregoing, Make-ready Work does not include the replacement of defective poles, or previously scheduled betterment programs initiated by HONetworks. —203— COUNCIL — JULY 13, 2004 "Permit" means the approved Application evidenced by the signature of a duly authorized HONetworks employee or designate in accordance with the terms and conditions of this Licence. "Pole Rental Rate" means the annual fee payable by the Licensee to HONetworks pursuant to the terms of this Licence. "Rearrange" or "Rearrangement' means the removal of Attachment(s) from one position on a Joint Use Pole and placing the same Attachment(s) and such incidental material as may be required in another position on the same Joint Use Pole. "Road Authority" means the Ministry of Transportation, a municipal corporation, board, commission, or other recognized body being in control of the construction, improvement, alteration, maintenance and repair of a highway or road and responsible therefor. "Standards" means the Canadian Standard Association Standard C22.3 No. 1-M87 "Overhead Lines", C22.2 "Electrical Code Part 1" or HONetworks Distribution Standards where such Distribution Standards are more stringent, as may be amended or updated from time to time hereafter. "Telecommunications Services" is as defined in the Telecommunications Act (federal) "Transfer" means the removal of Attachment(s) from one Joint Use Pole and placing the same Attachment(s) and such incidental materials as may be required on another Joint Use Pole. 2.0 TERM: 2.1 Subject to Sections 10.0 and 17.0 herein, the term of this Licence shall commence on the date first written above (the "Commencement Date") and will continue in full force and effect until the last day of December following a one (1) year period from the Commencement Date (the "Initial Term") and shall thereafter be automatically renewed on the first day of January for successive periods of one (1) year upon the same terms and conditions (with the exception of the Pole Rental Rate) herein (the Initial Term and renewal periods shall be collectively referred to as the "Term"); provided that either party may terminate this Licence at any time after the expiry of the Initial Term or any renewal period of 1 year by providing three (3) months written notice of termination to the other party, which notice may be given prior to the expiry of the Initial Term or the current 1- year renewal period. 2.2 This Licence shall be effective as of the Commencement Date and any prior agreements made between the parties providing for Joint Use of poles shall be void and of no effect. Notwithstanding the foregoing, any Permits presently in force and which authorize Joint Use shall be deemed to be Permits under the terms and conditions of this Licence. —204— COUNCIL — JULY 13, 2004 3.0 CONTRACT ADMINISTRATION GUIDE: ("CAG") 3.1 Both parties acknowledge and agree to comply with and be bound by the administrative and operating practices and processes outlined in the CAG for Road Authorities attached hereto as Schedule "A" which forms part of this Agreement. Both parties further acknowledge and agree that the said practices and processes shall govern the Licence herein and may be amender), added to, substituted or altered.from time to time, by mutual agreement of the parties and any reference in this Licence to the CAG shall be deemed to be a reference to same as it may from time to time be, whether in its original form or as amended, added to, substituted or altered from time to time. 4.0 APPLICATION FOR JOINT USE AND GRANT OF LICENSE: 4.1 HONetworks hereby grants to the Licensee, the right to place its Attachments on Joint Use Poles for the Term of this Licence in locations expressly authorized by HONetworks, as designated on a Permit or Permits in the form set out in Schedule "B" attached hereto and in accordance with the mutually agreed upon placement and safety practices and specifications outlined in the CAG. 4.2 Whenever the Licensee desires to place its Attachments on HONetworks' Joint Use Poles, both parties shall adhere to and be bound by the procedure set out in the CAG. 4.3 The Licensee shall pay to HONetworks the costs incurred by HONetworks for changes or additions to or Rearrangement of HONetworks' Joint Use Pole(s) and/or HONetworks' attachments to such Joint Use Pole(s) where the change, addition or Rearrangement is necessary to accommodate the Licensee's Attachment(s) and for any Line Clearing that HONetworks in its sole discretion, determines is required in order to accommodate the Licensee's Attachment(s) (the "Make-ready Work"). Upon completion of the Make-ready Work, HONetworks will render an invoice(s) to the Licensee for the costs thereof and the Licensee shall pay said invoice(s) within sixty (60) days of the invoice date. 4.4 Whenever the Licensee desires to modify, Rearrange, add to or remove from a Joint Use Pole its existing Attachments the parties shall proceed in the manner set out in the CAG. 5.0 INSTALLATION, MAINTENANCE AND OPERATION OF JOINT USE POLES: 5.1 In the event that HONetworks determines that there is an incidental Hazardous Condition, which includes, but is not limited to, deteriorated or defective HONetworks attachments and/or Joint Use Poles, HONetworks shall mark or band the Joint Use Pole(s) where the electrical or mechanical hazard exists in accordance with the CAG and shall correct the Hazardous Condition depending on its severity within 24 hours but in no event any longer than 30 days. Where a potential or actual Hazardous Condition is 0 —205— COUNCIL — JULY 13, 2004 determined by HONetworks to be wide spread, HONetworks shall notify the Licensee in writing of the potential safety risk and the nature of the hazard, as soon as reasonably possible, quantify, mark or band the poles where the Hazardous Condition exists and shall correct the Hazardous Condition within such reasonable time frame as possible. Until such time that HONetworks has remedied the Hazardous Condition, HONetworks shall offer protection to the Licensee and its employees and contractors at no cost until such time as the condition is corrected. 5.2 Both parties acknowledge and agree that if the Licensee proceeds to work on its Attachments located on the applicable Joint Use Pole(s) after receiving such notification by HONetworks and prior to HONetworks having rectified, replaced or provided adequate protection from the said attachments and/or Joint Use Poles, the Licensee shall do so at its own risk and shall assume all risk of damage, loss or injury to its Attachments or to Attachments of third parties and to its employees, servants, agents, representatives, contractors and other persons acting on its behalf in performing the work and third parties. 5.3 Subject to the foregoing, HONetworks shall at all times and at its sole expense maintain its Joint Use Poles and all of its own supporting attachments in a safe and serviceable condition and in accordance with applicable Standards and repair or replace said attachments and/or Joint Use Poles as they become defective, deteriorated or unsafe. 5.4 In the event that the Licensee determines that there is a potential or actual Hazardous Condition with its equipment, the Licensee shall notify HONetworks in writing of the potential safety risk and the nature of the hazard, as soon as reasonably possible. The Licensee shall correct the Hazardous Condition depending on its severity within 24 hours but in no event any longer than 30 days. 6.0 INSTALLATION, MAINTENANCE AND OPERATION OF ATTACHMENTS: 6.1 During the Term of this Licence, the Licensee covenants and agrees that it will: a) only attach Attachments to Joint Use Poles in locations identified in a Permit approved by HONetworks for those particular Attachments; b) attach Attachments in such a way so as not to interfere with the lines, works or equipment of HONetworks or of other permitted users of the Joint Use Poles; c) attach Attachments in accordance with the terms and conditions herein; d) not attach any Attachments until HONetworks has approved the Application for the specific Attachments; e) work in conjunction with HONetworks to develop a standard inventory format for the Attachments and develop an implementation plan with a view to have the inventory of Attachments completed on or before the end of the first three years from the Commencement Date. 6.2 The Licensee shall at all times and at its sole expense and in accordance with the terms and conditions of this Licence: 7 —206— COUNCIL — JULY 13, 2004 a) maintain and operate its Attachments to the Joint Use Poles in a safe and serviceable condition; b) replace the Attachments as they deteriorate; become defective or unsafe; and c) remove Attachments that are no longer required. 6.3 The Licensee shall, at its sole cost, Rearrange, Transfer or temporarily remove any of its Attachments, at HONetworks' request, where this is required for purposes of the placement, Rearrangement, maintenance or removal of any of HONetworks' attachments. The Licensee will perform such work within ninety (90) days after being notified in writing by HONetworks to do so, or within a shorter period of time in case of an emergency, as may be determined by HONetworks based on Good Utility Practice and which shall be relayed to the Licensee with reasons therefor. If the Licensee is unable to comply with any such notice, or in the event of emergency requiring immediate action, HONetworks may perform the said work, or cause the said work to be performed by others at the risk of damage to the Licensee's Attachments and at the expense of the Licensee. All costs and expenses incurred shall be properly documented by HONetworks and HONetworks shall be reimbursed by the Licensee for the said costs and expenses within sixty (60) days of issuance of an invoice by HONetworks. 7.0 PERFORMANCE GUARANTEE: 7.1 If HONetworks, in its sole and absolute discretion, determines that the Licensee has not had a previous satisfactory business relationship with HONetworks or any of its predecessors, HONetworks may, in its sole and absolute discretion, require that the Licensee deposit with HONetworks, security in a form satisfactory to HONetworks, securing the due performance of the obligations of the Licensee as provided for in this Licence. The amount of such security shall be the greater of (i) an amount equal to one year of Joint Use Pole Rental Rates; and (ii) one thousand dollars ($1,000.00). The security shall be maintained in good standing by the Licensee for a period of three years from the date that it is first placed with HONetworks or may continue if HONetworks, in its sole and absolute discretion, determines that the business relationship with the Licensee requires the continuation of the security. 8.0 RIGHT OF WAY: 8.1 The Licensee shall be responsible for obtaining any and all easements, rights of way, licenses, privileges, authorizations, permissions or other land rights from third parties including but not limited to, authorization or permission to locate on municipal or provincial road allowances or any other applicable authorization or permission required from any municipal, provincial or federal government or any agency, body or board thereof having jurisdiction, as may be necessary for the placement, operation and maintenance of its Attachments upon and along the Joint Use Poles provided for in a Permit. If the Licensee fails to comply with the provisions of this clause, it shall indemnify HONetworks from and against any and all claims or demands or other liability resulting from such failure. 3 —207— COUNCIL — JULY 13, 2004 8.2 In the event that an easement, right of way, license, privilege, authorization, permission or other land right referred to in clause 8.1 and obtained by the Licensee, becomes the subject of a dispute with any property owner, municipality or other directly interested party, the Licensee shall take all reasonable steps to resolve that dispute and will, in the event it cannot resolve the dispute amicably, cause it to be adjudicated before a court, tribunal or regulatory body having jurisdiction. The Licensee shall forthwith after it is rendered, abide by the final decision of that court, tribunal or regulatory body after any appeals or reviews have been decided. Notwithstanding the foregoing, should the property owner, municipality or other directly interested party obtain a mandatory injunction requiring HONetworks to remove or have the Attachments removed, the Licensee shall forthwith comply with the terms of the injunction as if the injunction was issued against the Licensee instead of HONetworks. If the Licensee does not comply within 48 hours of being notified by HONetworks, HONetworks may remove or cause the Attachments to be removed by others at the risk of damage to the Licensee's Attachments and the Licensee shall pay HONetworks' costs. Nothing in this clause shall be deemed to confer on the Licensee any authority to continue to occupy the Joint Use Pole or otherwise to infringe upon any rights of such property owners, municipalities or other persons. 9.0 SAFETY AND COMPLIANCE WITH APPLICABLE LAW: 9.1 Each party agrees that its employees, agents, representatives, contractors or subcontractors in the performance of the party's obligations and the exercise of the party's rights under this Licence shall at all times: a) Comply with the Standards and all applicable laws, rules, orders, ordinances, regulations and other rules of all lawful authorities acting within their powers; b) Comply with the placement, safety practices and specifications set out in the CAG; c) Ensure that all of its employees, agents, representatives, contractors or subcontractors engaged in the Transfer, Rearrangement, placement, maintenance, operation and removal of Attachments to or from the Joint Use Poles are qualified to deal with electrical hazards in accordance with the requirements of the Occupational Health & Safety Act, (Ontario) as amended and all applicable regulations thereto including, Construction Projects — O. Reg. 213/91 or Part 11 of the Canada Labour Code, R.S.C. 1985, c. L.2, as amended and all applicable regulations thereto, whichever is more stringent; and d) Ensure that all requirements of the Electrical Safety Authority are met. 0 041IM COUNCIL — JULY 13, 2004 10.0 POLE RENTAL RATES: 10.1 The Licensee shall, during the Initial Term of this Licence, pay to HONetworks a Pole Rental Rate of $2.04 per Attachment per year. On or before the first day of November prior to the expiry of the Initial Term or any one-year renewal period, HONetworks shall notify the Licensee of the Pole Rental Rate applicable from and after the first day of January for the next renewal period, and the Licensee shall commence paying the new rate effective the first day of January of the said renewal period. If HONetworks fails to notify the Licensee as set out in the immediately preceding sentence, the Pole Rental Rate shall be increased by the increase, if any, to the Cost of Living Index for Ontario ("COLI") as reported for September of the previous year and such increase will be noted on HONetworks' invoice to the Licensee. If HONetworks increases the Pole Rental Rate for any period, the Licensee may, notwithstanding clause 2.1 of this Licence, terminate this Licence by giving HONetworks written notice of termination within 30 days after having received from HONetworks the said notice of increase of the Pole Rental Rate for the next renewal period. The said notice of termination shall be effective on the expiry date of the Initial Term or the current one year renewal period, whichever may be applicable. 10.2 The Pole Rental Rate for any given year, during the Term of this Licence, shall be invoiced by HONetworks on or before the first day of November to the Licensee and the Licensee has the option of making a lump sum payment by no later than sixty (60) days after the invoice date or making payments of quarterly installments to be paid on or before the first day of each of January, March, June and September in each year. 10.3 For the purpose of the invoice payable pursuant to the terms and conditions of this Licence, HONetworks shall invoice the Licensee for and the Licensee shall pay HONetworks the Pole Rental Rate ioi the renewal period for all Attachments as contained in the inventory as of September 30th of the year the invoice is prepared. 10.4 The Licensee shall pay and indemnify and save harmless HONetworks against: a) the portion of any access fees or other fees, charges or costs . imposed on HONetworks by the Ministry of Transportation, municipal corporations or other road authority for the construction, erection, maintenance, operation and/or removal of Joint Use Poles and other plant or equipment on applicable lands that are directly attributable to, relate to or connected with the presence of its Attachments on Joint Use Poles; and b) all taxes, rates, assessments, or fees of every nature and kind which are levied upon its Attachments designated on a Permit or any other taxes, rents, assessments or fees levied by reason of the rights granted to the Licensee by this Licence. 10.5 Throughout this Licence, any reference to HONetworks' costs means the actual charges for labour, materials and equipment plus applicable overheads. The above referenced charges and rates are those in effect at the time that the work is performed and materials are provided and will change from time to time during the term of this Licence. 10 —209— COUNCIL — JULY 13, 2004 11.0 DIVISION OF COSTS: 11.1 Except where expressly provided herein, both parties acknowledge and agree that the costs involved in erecting, placing, maintaining and otherwise dealing with the Joint Use Poles and Attachments shall be borne by or divided between each party or the parties respectively as outlined in the CAG. 12.0 UNAUTHORIZED ATTACHMENTS: 12.1 If at any time during the Term of this Licence an Attachment(s) is attached to the Joint Use Poles without a Permit(s) being approved by or on behalf of HONetworks for such Attachment(s), the Licensee shall remove the said unauthorized Attachment(s) as requested by HONetworks. Failing removal of said unauthorized Attachment(s) HONetworks shall have the right to forthwith remove any and all unauthorized Attachment(s) placed on the Joint Use Poles and to charge the Licensee for all costs incurred by HONetworks as a result of the removal of such unauthorized Attachment(s) on and from -its Joint Use Poles. Where it is determined by HONetworks, in its sole and absolute discretion to be feasible to do so, the Licensee may submit a revised or new Application for Licensed Occupancy of Poles to reflect the Attachment(s). In the event the revised or new Application for Licensed Occupancy of Poles is approved by HONetworks, the said Attachment(s) become (s) authorized and may remain on the Joint Use Poles subject to the terms and conditions of this Licence. 12.2 In addition to the Pole Rental Rate payable for authorized Attachment(s) and the costs identified in clause 12.1 above, the Licensee agrees to pay to HONetworks the total Pole Rental Rate for any unauthorized Attachment(s) commencing from the date upon which the unauthorized Attachment(s) are placed on the Joint Use Poles or for a period of five years or five hundred dollars ($500.00) whichever amount is greater, the total Pole Rental Rate being calculated by using the Pole Rental Rate for the current year for such Attachment(s). 12.3 The parties agree that the total Pole Rental Rate herein provided shall be deemed to be fair and just in the circumstances and shall be treated as liquidated damages and not as a penalty. Should the number of unauthorized Attachment(s) exceed 2% of the number of Attachments for which Permits have been granted, the Licensee will also pay to HONetworks its labour costs associated with the audit inspection wherein HONetworks discovered the unauthorized Attachment(s). 13.0 EXISTING RIGHTS OF OTHERS: 13.1 If HONetworks has granted to any other' individual, partnership, corporation or any other entity that is not a party to this Licence, by contract or otherwise, rights or privileges to use any of its Joint Use Poles not covered by this Licence, nothing herein contained shall be construed as affecting such rights or privileges if and when this Licence is made applicable to such Joint Use Poles, and HONetworks shall have the right, by contract or otherwise, to continue and extend such existing rights or privileges. 11 —210— COUNCIL — JULY 13, 2004 14.0 LIABILITY, DAMAGE AND INDEMNIFICATION: 14.1 The Licensee does hereby assume all risk of damage to or loss of its Attachments howsoever caused, and does for itself and its successors and assigns hereby release and forever discharge HONetworks, its successors and assigns, its employees, agents, servants and representatives from all claims and demands with respect thereto except for such loss and damage caused by HONetworks' negligence. The Licensee does hereby fully indemnify and save harmless HONetworks, its successors and assigns, its employees, agents, servants and representatives of, from and against all damage, loss or injury to persons or property which may be suffered or which may hereafter be sustained or incurred by reason of, or in any way relating to, arising from, or based upon the exercise by the Licensee of the permission herein granted or the performance of or purported performance of or non-performance of the Licensee of any of its obligations or covenants in this Licence and all manner of actions, suits, causes of action, proceedings, charges, expenses, risks, liabilities, debts, obligations, duties, claims and demands in connection therewith, except where the foregoing is caused by HONetworks' negligence. 14.2 HONetworks does hereby fully indemnify and save harmless the Licensee, its successors and assigns, its employees, agents, servants and representatives of; from and against all damage, loss or injury to persons or property which may be suffered or which may hereafter be sustained or incurred by reason of the negligence of HONetworks and all manner of actions, suits, causes of action, proceedings, charges, expenses, risks, liabilities, debts, obligations, duties, claims and demands in connection therewith. 14.3 During the term of this Licence, the Licensee shall immediately notify HONetworks of any damage whatsoever to HONetworks' or a third party's equipment arising as a result of the Licensee affixing or maintaining any of its Attachments. The Licensee shall also immediately notify HONetworks of any claims received by the Licensee related in any way to its Attachments. HONetworks shall immediately notify the Licensee of any damage whatsoever to the Licensee's Attachments arising as a result of HONetworks replacing, Rearranging, Transferring, modifying, maintaining or repairing any of its Attachments. 14.4 Notwithstanding anything to the contrary in this Licence, HONetworks shall not be liable to the Licensee for any indirect or consequential damages or damages for pure economic loss. 14.5 Both parties acknowledge and agree that this Section 14.0 shall survive termination of this Licence. 15.0 DISPUTE RESOLUTION: 15.1 HONetworks and the Licensee shall seek to resolve problems or concerns at the operational level, except in circumstances where an emergency exists as may be determined by HONetworks using Good Utility Practice, in which case this Section does 12 —211— COUNCIL — JULY 13, 2004 not apply. If such disputes or any other disputes related to this Licence are not resolved within thirty (30) days, either party may, by notice to the other, refer the dispute to a committee to be formed and to be comprised of two (2) representatives, one appointed by each party. If the two representatives cannot resolve the dispute within ten (10) days after referral to them, either party may seek such further recourse as they deem appropriate. Nothing in this Section serves as a waiver of any other rights or remedies that either party may have pursuant to this Licence, at law or equity. 16.0 INSURANCE: 16.1 The Licensee shall, during the Term of this Agreement, procure and maintain, at its own expense, insurance policies in which HONetworks is named as an additional insured in the amount of Five Million Dollars ($5,000,000.00) against liability due to damage to HONetworks' property or property of any other person or persons and against liability due to injury to or death of any person or persons in any one instance. Such policies of insurance shall: a) contain a severability of interest clause and cross liability clause between the Licensee and HONetworks. b) be non-contributing with, and shall apply only as primary and not excess to any other insurance available to HONetworks; c) provide that it shall not be cancelled or amended so as to reduce or restrict coverage except upon thirty (30) days prior notice (by registered mail) to HONetworks. 16.2 The Licensee shall, upon HONetworks' request, provide HONetworks with evidence, satisfactory to HONetworks, of the Licensee's compliance and continued compliance with clause 16.1. 16.3 The Licensee agrees that the insurance described in clause 16.1 herein does not in any way limit the Licensee's liability pursuant to the indemnity provisions of this Licence. 17.0 TERNIINATION: 17.1 The permission granted by any Permit may be terminated by HONetworks: (i) if the Joint Use Pole(s) designated by such Permit is abandoned by HONetworks; or (ii) if HONetworks desires or must discontinue the use of the Joint Use Pole(s), and in either case, HONetworks shall provide the Licensee with at least ninety (90) days prior written notice thereof. If the Joint Use Pole(s) designated by such Permit(s) is sold, HONetworks 13 —212— COUNCIL — JULY 13, 2004 may not transfer any Joint Use Pole unless as a condition of transfer the purchaser agrees to continue to allow the Attachment(s) thereon for the remainder of the Term. 17.2 If the Licensee defaults at any time in the payment of the Pole Rental Rate or fails to or neglects at any time to fully perform, observe and comply with all the terms, conditions and covenants herein, then HONetworks shall as soon as practicable, notify the Licensee in writing of such default and the Licensee shall correct such default to the satisfaction of HONetworks within thirty (30) days of the issuance of such notice or within a longer time period if agreeable to HONetworks, failing which HONetworks may forthwith terminate this Licence and the privileges herein granted. 17.3 HONetworks shall be entitled, at its option, to terminate this Licence immediately upon written notice to the Licensee upon the Licensee becoming bankrupt or insolvent or upon the Licensee ceasing to carry on business. 17.4 The termination of a Permit approved pursuant to this Licence shall not be deemed to betermination of this Licence unless such Permit is the last remaining or only Permit approved pursuant to this Licence in which case the termination of the Permit shall be deemed to be termination of this Licence. 17.5 Upon the termination of this Licence or of a Permit approved pursuant to this Licence, the Licensee shall at its sole expense and at the request of HONetworks, remove from the Joint Use Poles its Attachment(s) covered by this Licence, or by the terminated Permit within ninety (90) days after receipt of notice thereof or within a shorter period of time in case of an emergency as may be determined by HONetworks, failing which HONetworks may, at the Licensee's risk of damage to the Licensee's Attachment(s) and at the expense of the Licensee, remove such Attachment(s). Upon the removal of such Attachment(s) by HONetworks, HONetworks shall have the right to retain the Attachment(s) so removed until the Licensee pays the cost of removal thereof and if the Licensee fails to pay such costs within thirty (30) days of invoicing then HONetworks shall have the further right to sell the Attachment(s) so removed and apply the amount so received against the costs of removing the Attachment(s). 17.6 It is understood and agreed by both parties that any termination of this Licence shall not relieve either party of or from its obligations hereunder, save and except for the establishment of new Joint Use Agreement and notwithstanding any such termination, this Licence shall remain in full force and effect with respect to all Joint Use Poles used by the parties at the time of such termination until the use of such Joint Use Poles has been discontinued by HONetworks or the Licensee has removed its Attachments from such Joint Use Poles whichever shall first occur. 18.0 FAILURE TO COMPLY AND LATE PAYMENTS: 18.1 Failure of either party to enforce or insist upon compliance with any of the terms or provisions of this Licence shall not constitute a general waiver or relinquishment of 14 —213— COUNCIL — JULY 13, 2004 any such terms or provisions, but the same shall be and remain at all times in full force and effect. 18.2 All invoices rendered by HONetworks in accordance with the terms and conditions of this Licence that are outstanding for longer than 60 days from the date of the invoice shall bear interest at 18% per annum. 19.0 FORCE MAJEURE: 19.1 Save and except for the payment of any monies required hereunder, neither party shall be deemed to be in default of this Licence where the failure to perform or the delay in performing any obligation is due wholly or in part to a cause beyond its reasonable control, including but not limited to an act of God, an act of any federal, provincial, municipal or government authority, civil commotion, strikes, lockouts and other labour disputes, fires, floods, sabotage, earthquakes, storms, epidemics, and an inability to perform due to causes beyond the reasonable control of the party. The party subject to such an event of force majeure shall promptly notify the other party of its inability to perform or of any delay in performing due to an event of force majeure and shall provide an estimate, as soon as practicable, as to when the obligation will be performed. The time for performing the obligation shall be extended for a period equal to the time during which the party was subject to the event of force majeure. Both parties shall explore all reasonable avenues available to avoid or resolve events of force majeure in the shortest time possible, but this requirement shall not oblige the party suffering the strike, lockout or labour dispute to compromise its position in such dispute. 20.0 RELATIONSHIP OF PARTIES: 20.1 Nothing in this Licence creates the relationship of principal and agent, employer and employee, partnership or joint venture between the parties. The parties agree that they are and will at all times remain independent and are not and shall not represent themselves to be the agent, employee, partner or joint venture of the other. No representations will be made or acts taken by either party which could establish any apparent relationship of agency, employment, joint venture or partnership and no party shall be bound in any manner whatsoever by any Licenses, warranties or representations made by the other party to any other person nor with respect to any other action of the other party. 21.0 NOTICE: 21.1 Any notice or other writing required or permitted to be given under this Agreement or for the purposes of it, to any party, shall be valid only if delivered in writing in accordance with this clause. Notices can be provided to: 15 —214— COUNCIL — JULY 13, 2004 in respect of the Licensee: Name: 1 6-V n C7�� Ajar f,y riv Address: A%^ C, 1>l 4X \ Q i t L 1& 6J l Fax: C9 0) PHI - -7119 Contact Person:y°V - 0 r "1 LAC- 'il 5D'n in respect of HONetworks: Hydro One Networks Inc. Attn: Joint Use Manager 483 Bay Street 15`h Floor, North Tower Toronto, Ontario M5G 2P5 The parties may change their respective addresses and addressees for delivery by delivering notices of such changes as provided herein. Notice sent accordingly shall be deemed delivered and received: (a) If delivered by hand, upon receipt; (b) If delivered by fax, 48 hours after the time of transmission, excluding from the calculation weekends and public holidays; (c) If delivered by overnight courier, four (4) days after the couriering thereof; and (d) If delivered by registered mail, six (6) days after the mailing thereof, provided that if there is a postal strike such notice shall be delivered by hand, or courier or fax. 22.0 NON -ASSIGNMENT: 22. Neither this Licence nor any rights, remedies, liabilities or obligations arising under it or by reason of it nor Permit(s) granted hereunder shall be assignable by the Licensee, without the prior written consent of HONetworks, which shall not be unreasonably withheld. 23.0 ENTIRE AGREEMENT: 23.1 This Licence, together with the CAG and other Schedules attached hereto, constitutes the entire agreement between HONetworks and the Licensee with respect to the matter herein and supersedes all prior oral or written representations and agreements. W1 -215- COUNCIL — JULY 13, 2004 24.0 AMENDMENTS: 24.1 No amendment, modification or supplement to this Licence shall be valid or binding unless set out in writing and executed by the parties with the same degree of formality as the execution of this Licence. 25.0 SEVERABILITY: 25.1 If any provision of this Licence is declared invalid or unenforceable by any competent authority such provision shall be deemed severed and shall not affect the validity or enforceability of the remaining provisions of this Licence, unless such invalidity or unenforceability renders the operation of this Licence impossible. 26.0 OTHER INFORMATION: 26.1 Each party shall at the other party's request and expense execute and do all such further acts and things as may be necessary to carry out the full intent and meaning of this Licence and the transactions contemplated thereby. 27.0 COUNTERPARTS: 27.1 This Licence may be executed in counterparts and the counterparts together shall constitute an original. 28.0 REASONABLENESS: 28.1 Each party agrees that it shall at all times act reasonably in the performance of its obligations and the exercise of its rights under this Licence. 29.0 APPLICABLE LAW: 29.1 This Agreement shall be construed and enforced in accordance with, and the rights of the parties shall be governed by, the laws of the Province of Ontario and the federal laws of Canada applicable therein and the Parties hereto irrevocably attorn to the exclusive jurisdiction of the courts of the Province of Ontario in the event of a dispute hereunder. 17 —216— COUNCIL — JULY 13, 2004 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this Agreement to be executed by the signatures of their proper representatives duly authorized in that behalf. HYDRO ONE NETWORKS INC. Name: Laura Formusa Title: Secretary I have the authority to bind the corporation. THE CORPORATION OF THE TOWN OF AURORA Name: " Title: I have the authority to bind the Town. —217— 18 COUNCIL — JULY 13, 2004 SCHEDULE"A" Contract Administration Guide ("CAG") 1.0 APPLICATION FOR JOINT USE 1.1 Whenever the Licensee desires to place Attachments on HONetworks' Poles, the Licensee shall submit to HONetworks an Application. The Licensee shall fully complete and submit to HONetworks a written or electronic Application, signed by its duly authorized officer (see sample attached hereto as Appendix 1). The location of the Joint Use Pole(s) in question and the number and kind of Attachments that the Licensee desires to place thereon shall be specified in the Application. 1.2 The location of Attachments on Joint Use Poles shall be reviewed and determined if appropriate by HONetworks at a joint field visit before Joint Use is established unless otherwise expressly agreed to by both parties. The usual position for Attachments will be on the roadside of Joint Use Poles. All of the Attachments will normally be on the same side of the Joint Use Pole to minimize climbing hazards and to facilitate pole replacement. 1.3 If HONetworks is willing to grant the permission requested in the Application, HONetworks shall signify its acceptance of the Application by affixing the signature of its duly authorized representative, upon the duplicate copy of the Application or electronic Application and shall return it to the Licensee and such accepted Application shall thereupon be and shall constitute a Permit hereunder. 1.4 Notwithstanding anything contained herein, it is understood and agreed by both pariies that HONetworks may reject any Application it receives pursuant to clause 1.1; and when HONetworks rejects an Application, it shall return the duplicate thereof to the Licensee indicating thereon its rejection and the reason therefor. When the reason for rejection may be satisfied by the Licensee,, the Licensee may re -submit the Application to HONetworks for re -consideration and if accepted by HONetworks such accepted Application shall thereupon be and shall constitute a Permit hereunder. 1.5 HONetworks shall return the Application to the Licensee either accepted or rejected within 30 days after receipt of the Application for installations up to and including 49 proposed Attachments or 60 days for larger Applications unless extenuating circumstances prevent HONetworks from doing so within this timeframe. 1.6 HONetworks may, at its discretion, require, the Licensee to pay the costs of having HONetworks' employee(s) attend at the location of the poles designated on the "Application to determine the following: @ Make-ready Work required to accommodate the Licensee's Attachment(s); (ii) the cost of preparing an estimate of such Make-ready Work; and (iii) the cost of preparing an Application (if requested to do so by the Licensee). t —218— COUNCIL — JULY 13, 2004 1.7 Both parties acknowledge and agree that the permission to attach Attachments to the Joint Use Poles shall be deemed to be effective as of the date of the approval of each Permit approved by or on behalf of HONetworks. 1.8 Upon the request by the Licensee, HONetworks may, in its sole discretion, agree to rebuild, alter, add to or change the existing Joint Use Poles to accommodate the Attachments and the parties shall comply with the division of costs incurred as a result thereof in accordance with Decision Table 13. 1.9 Both parties acknowledge and agree that the application process shall consider existing safety hazards, route design, as well as imminent and future loading on the specified poles. 2.0 CONTRACTORS, OWNERS AND EMPLOYEES 2.1 Contractors may be used by HONetworks or the Licensee to do any work in connection with HONetworks' attachments on Joint Use Poles and the Licensee's Attachments respectively. Each party is responsible for retaining its own contractors and for ensuring compliance with the terms and conditions set out in the CAG and the Agreement for Licensed Occupancy of Power Utility Distribution Poles (the "Agreement"). 2.2 Each party shall ensure that its employees, agents, representatives, contractors or subcontractors in the performance of the party's obligations and the exercise of the parry's rights under the Agreement and the CAG: a) Comply with the Standards and all applicable laws, rules, orders, ordinances, regulations and other rules of all lawful authorities acting within their powers as well as the requirements of the Electrical Safety Authority; b) Comply with the placement, safety practices and specifications set out in the CAG; c) Are competent and qualified to deal with electrical hazards in accordance with the requirements of the Occupational Health & Safety Act, (Ontario) as amended and all applicable regulations thereunder including, without limitation, Construction Projects — 0. Reg. 213/91 or Part 11 of the Canada Labour Code, R.S.C. 1985, c. L.2, as amended and all applicable regulations thereunder, whichever is more stringent. 2.3 A party shall not direct or supervise employees, agents, representatives contractors or subcontractors of the other party. Notice of violation or non-compliance given to a contractor shall also be provided at the same time or as soon as possible thereafter to an authorized representative of the party responsible for the contractor. 2.4 HONetworks may request from the Licensee and, within 30 days after receipt of such request, the Licensee shall provide to HONetworks, documentation in respect of processes and procedures that the Licensee and/or its contractors and subcontractors have in place to ensure that work on the Joint Use Poles is completed in a competent and safe manner. 2 —219— COUNCIL — JULY 13, 2004 3.0 OWNERSHIP IDENTIFICATION OF POLES 3.1 Pole markings are placed on all HONetworks Joint Use Poles to clearly indicate ownership, placement year, and pole test and treatment date as shown in Figure 3-1 below. The Joint Use Poles may also be marked with pole tag insignia to denote pole number, switch number, transformer location and other information. Any additional markings, desired by the Licensee, must first be approved by HONetworks. (a) Standard for installing dating nails; prior to June 4, 2003: For Joint Use Poles 55 ft (16.8M) or less, the brands is loft (3.0M) from the butt. For Joint Use Poles over 55 ft, the brand is 14 ft (4.3 M) from the butt. r' •, g3 Note: Top diagram depicts nail with treatment year. Bottom diagram .. depicts nail with installation year. 6l (b) New standard for installing dating nails; after June 4, 2003: For Joint Use Poles 70 ft (21.3 M) or less, the brands is 1Oft (3.0 M) from the butt. For Joint Use Poles over 70 ft, the brand is 15 ft (4.6 M) from the butt. ONote: Dating nails to be installed one above the other, e.g. 2003 O It should be noted the dating nails are installed at or near the brand height. Figure 3-1. HONetworks Owned Pole Marking 4.0 MARKING AND CORRECTION OF HAZARDOUS CONDITIONS 4.1 Hazardous Conditions identified by either party shall be corrected by HONetworks as soon as practicable and the Licensee shall cooperate as fully as possible for the said correction. Subject to Section 13.0 herein, Hazardous Conditions created by HONetworks' Joint Use Pole identified by either party shall be marked or banded in accordance with clause 4.2 below and shall be corrected by HONetworks. In the event of a potential or actual wide spread Hazardous Condition created by HONetworks on the Joint Use Pole, HONetworks shall notify the Licensee in writing of the potential safety risk and the nature of the Hazardous Condition. If the Hazardous Condition is created by the Licensee and the Licensee does not agree to pay for the costs to correct the said Hazardous Condition, HONetworks may remove the Licensee's Attachments at the Licensee's expense and at the sole risk of damage to the Licensee's Attachments. HONetworks shall be reimbursed by the Licensee for the said costs of removal within thirty (30) days of issuance of and invoice by HONetworks. 3 —220— COUNCIL — JULY 13, 2004 4.2 Defective or deteriorated Joint Use Poles and electrical Hazardous Conditions shall be marked by HONetworks as follows: (a) Electrical hazards: Red belted tag holder with tag (b) Structural hazards: Orange band or painted orange/red band around pole (4' to 5' above ground line.) Note: HONetworks uses a red belted tag holder for work protection and under no circumstances shall anyone work above the red band. 5.0 CLEARANCES 5.1 The placement of Attachments shall meet or exceed the requirements w noted in the CAG. 6.0 SAFE CLIMBING CONDITIONS 6.1 The Licensee shall comply with the following requirements which are concerned primarily with the provision for safe climbing conditions: (a) Clearance from Base of Poles No Licensee pedestal or other above ground fixture shall be installed above grade within 2.5m (8 ft.) of the base of a HONetworks Joint Use Pole. New Joint Use Poles should be located 3m away from aboveground objects such as hydrants or fence posts. (b) Pole Mounted Attachments on a Pole The Licensee's Attachments can include the following: (i) mast arms, luminaries, supply conductors, relays and other equipment required to operate a street lighting system (fi) traffic signal, power and control cables, junction and splice boxes and any other equipment and/or devices normally required for the operation of traffic signals (iii) service attachments (iv) decorative lighting (v) standards (banners down the side of poles) (vi) seasonal decorations. For purposes of the Agreement, an Attachment does not include any material, apparatus, equipment or facility owned by the Licensee for the provision of Telecommunications Services and all such attachments shall require a separate License. 4 —221— COUNCIL — JULY 13, 2004 Metal signs presenting a thin knife -like edge will not be allowed on HONetworks' poles. These signs represent significant opportunity for injury if not removed when working aloft and are to be avoided. The Licensee's Attachments shall be identified on the Application. Location on frequently climbed poles such as recloser, switch or transformer poles is to be avoided if possible, although it is recognized that for roadway lighting, installation on these poles may be required. Subsidiary apparatus poles are the preferred alternatives. Attachments that do not have access by aerial devices shall not be allowed on poles. The space in which miscellaneous attachments can be installed is 2.5m (8 ft.) (lowest point of attachment) above grade to lm (311.) feet below the telecommunication section on the pole. Attachments are limited to two per pole and may be permitted only if all safety and climbing conditions are met. Banners and strings of lights extending from one pole to another, typically across the road allowance will not be allowed. These installations can be accommodated by the municipality installing separate poles with the proper back -guying to accommodate the banner and strings of lights. (c) Size & weight of Attachments The maximum size of any Attachment in or below communication space shall be lm (3 ft) high by 0.3m (1 ft.) wide and a depth of 0.3m (1 ft.) for equipment not including standoff brackets that allow a minimum of 80mm (3 in.) space between the Joint Use Pole and the Attachment. The maximum size for a bracket mounted Attachment shall not exceed 2m (611) high by lm (31) wide and a depth of 0.7m (30in.). Attachments cannot exceed 80 pounds. eanm mk*r m pad Figure 6.1: Attachments with Stand-off Brackets (where permissible) Standards (banners down the side of poles) must be detachable at the bottom to minimize their impact on climbing the pole and will be required to have a proper mounting bracket at the top to securely attach to the pole. The mounting bracket should be sufficiently heavy to support the banner under all weather conditions and wide enough not to present a knife like edge in case of a falling accident. A rounded bracket is preferred. 5 —222— COUNCIL — JULY 13, 2004 (d) Structural /Material Composition All Attachments shall be constructed and composed of a non flammable material and be supported by a bracket made of stainless steel, aluminum or aluminum alloy which is easy to remove from the pole. (e) Methods of attachment to the Pole Attachments to the Joint Use Poles shall be by means of stainless steel banding tape or galvanized clamp bands. (d) Location of Attachments on Pole Attachments must be mounted on the roadside of the Joint Use Pole to maximize safe climbing space. Vertical Attachments such as conductors, cables, and conduit shall be grouped together such that a minimum continuous surface of 60% of the Joint Use Pole circumference shall remain clear for climbing. (e) Special Poles Steel, concrete or wood poles treated with preservatives, which restrict climbing, prohibit normal construction and operational methods using conventional climbing practices. If normally accepted climbing practices cannot be employed, then the parties shall agree to an alternate method required to install and maintain their respective Attachments on the said poles. (f) Subsidiary Apparatus Pole Where required, the Licensee's apparatus pole.Aall be placed `in line' and at least 3 meters (10 ft.) from a Joint Use Pole. The top of the apparatus pole should not extend more than 0.3m (1 ft.) above the Licensee's Attachment. (g) Separation of Aerial and Underground Facilities Separation of at least one meter from below ground facilities shall be maintained between centerlines of overhead and underground facilities to enable safe operating space for power augers during the replacement or addition of HONetworks' Joint Use Poles. The Licensee acknowledges that any encroachments of the one meter separation may cause a potential risk of future interruptions, cable damage and expense to repair for the Licensee. 7.0 GUYING AND ANCHORING 7.1 For streetlights and other miscellaneous attachments, additional guys and anchors are normally not required. If additional anchoring is required due to the Licensee's Attachments, the anchors and guys shall be installed by the Licensee and at the Licensee's expense. 6 —223— COUNCIL - JULY 13, 2004 7.2 The Licensee's anchors must be placed with a minimum separation of 1.5 in (5ft) from HONetworks' anchor. 7.3 Where separate anchoring is undesirable, the parties may cooperate to jointly study the feasibility of and, if agreeable to HONetworks, implement joint anchoring. If HONetworks agrees to such joint anchoring, HONetworks will install such joint anchoring at the Licensee's expense. 7.4 When adding or changing guys and anchors, the installing party shall not affect the existing tension on the other party's guys or disturb existing anchors. 7.5 Crossing guy wires is undesirable, however, where it is unavoidable, the minimum clearance between crossing guys (the point at which two guys cross) shall be 80 mm (3in). 8.0 STRAIN INSULATORS 8.1 Strain insulators of the appropriate mechanical strength and voltage rating shall be installed on all down guys. Strain insulators on the Licensee's guys must be installed between 2.7 in to 3.6 in (8 to 12 feet) above ground and shall be installed by the Licensee. The Licensee's insulators must be maintained by the Licensee in safe working condition at all times. 9.0 POLE TOP EXTENSIONS 9.1 Description Pole top extensions are made of solid epoxy resin fiberglass rod and may, at HONetworks' discretion, be installed by HONetworks at the pole top to raise the primary conductor in order to obtain the separation required at the higher voltage. An explanation will be provided in the case of denial. 9.2 Restriction The pole top extension(s) are to be used only by HONetworks for tangent applications where a Joint Use Pole replacement would otherwise be necessary (i.e. they cannot be used on new construction). 10.0 BONDING AND CONNECTION 10.1 Bonding of all metal components (streetlight arm and head) with a minimum conductor size of #4 copper stranded is required and shall be adhered to by the Licensee. 10.2 The Licensee shall request any electrical connection required for new installations by contacting HONetworks. 7 -224- COUNCIL — JULY 13, 2004 10.3 The Licensee may employ a qualified worker or contractor to perform work on the streetlight system. Such workers may disconnect and reconnect any streetlight component connected from HONetworks' wires for maintenance purposes provided all rules, standards and Electrical Safety Authority requirements are complied with. Such qualified worker may also connect the #4 bond wire to the HONetworks electrical system, that may be absent from older installations. 10.4 The Licensee shall make all appropriate applications to the Electrical Safety Authority and shall provide all of the streetlight information to HONetworks to ensure accurate information is provided for energy billing and audit purposes. 10.5 The Licensee acknowledges that where the Attachments on Joint Use Poles constitute streetlights or other plant that consumes energy, the amounts charged for the energy consumption is usually based on a flat rate and is calculated using the lamp size and ballast losses. 11.0 ELECTRICAL INTERFERENCE AND OPERATION 11.1 If the Licensee's Attachments are causing electrical interference, the Licensee shall take the appropriate action at its sole expense to rectify the situation. The parties shall cooperate with each other to facilitate the Licensee's action to resolve such problems. 11.2 The Licensee shall ensure that photo cells properly operate and turn the streetlights off during daylight hours. The Licensee shall monitor this issue independent of HONetworks and shall develop a response mechanism that allows the repair of any such light in 5 working days from notice of constant operation. 12.0 JOINT PLANNING 12.1 Subject to clause 12.3 below, regular.Joint Use meetings will be held annually to plan for new construction, re -construction, major changes and Line Clearing programs. Job progress and any problems that have developed since the previous meeting shall be discussed. HONetworks will use its best efforts to include all other third party owners of attachments. 12.2 Subject to clause 12.3 below, HONetworks agrees to provide the Licensee with the right to reserve extra space for its Attachments on Joint Use Poles during the design phase of placing, replacing or upgrading Joint Use poles. The Licensee agrees that prior to commencement of construction, the Licensee will confirm its Agreement to pay HONetworks the extra costs associated with the said extra space. HONetworks will issue an invoice for the extra cost and payment is due 60 days from the date the invoice is issued. 12.3 Both parties understand that due to the changing work environment, clauses 12,1 and 12.2 may not be an achievable goal and therefore do not hold each other liable in the event that the parties fail to comply with the obligations contained in the said clauses. 8 —225— COUNCIL — JULY 13, 2004 13.0 DIVISION OF COSTS (see Table 13) If Make-ready Work is required, the cost of such work will be paid for as described below. Should a situation arise that is not adequately described in this section, HONetworks has sole discretion to determine the amount the Licensee will pay and the Licensee shall pay such amount when due. All final interpretations of the application of the policy described in this section will be as decided by HONetworks. 13.1 Joint Use Pole: (a) If a pole change(s) is required to establish Joint Use, the Make-ready Work required to accommodate the Licensee's request shall be charged to the Licensee and the Licensee shall pay all labour, payroll burden, specific overheads, either general construction or general administrative overhead, material, and sundry costs to install and relocate all HONetworks attachments. This actual cost shall be discounted 2% per year to a maximum of 75%. The per year is calculated using the year the new pole is installed minus the age of the replaced pole. Example: (2002 -1972) x 2% = 60% The Licensee shall pay the actual costs less 60% 13.2 Ceasing Joint Use: (a) Subject to clause 13.2(b) below, the cost of removing Joint Use Pole(s) is borne by HONetworks, who retains ownership of the Joint Use Pole(s) unless otherwise agreed to by the parties. (b) Where HONetworks has removed its attachments from a Joint Use Pole and has cut off the top of the Joint Use Pole above the Licensee's Attachments, the Licensee shall either acquire the Joint Use Pole (at a mutually agreed price or remove its Attachments from the said Joint Use Pole by no later than 60 days after the date of notification to the Licensee by HONetworks and the Licensee shall remove its Attachments at its own risk and expense. (c) Where the Licensee desires or is required to discontinue the use of Joint Use Poles or where the use of such Joint Use Poles has been terminated by cancellation of the Permit, the Licensee shall remove its Attachments, from the Joint Use Poles. The Licensee shall remove all such attachments within 90 days ,after receipt of notification to remove from HONetworks and if the Licensee fails to comply, HONetworks shall remove the Licensee's Attachments at the Licensee's expense and at the Licensee's risk of damage to the Licensee's Attachments. (d) If the Licensee wishes to modify, Rearrange, add to or remove its Attachments from Joint Use Poles, it shall notify HONetworks and submit a revised Application or cancel its existing applicable Permit accordingly. In the case of the Licensee's request for 9 —226— COUNCIL — JULY 13, 2004 additional Attachments, HONetworks will inspect the Joint Use Poles at the Licensee's expense and review the revised Application in accordance with section 1.0 above. 13.3 Existing Joint Use - Cost re: Attaching, Transferring & Rearranging Attachments: (a) Licensee's Request Where HONetworks is required to attach, Transferor Rearrange its attachments solely for the purpose of establishing new Joint Use or adding to existing Joint Use, the Licensee shall pay the costs to attach, Transfer or Rearrange HONetworks' attachments. (b) Third Party Requests to Remove, Replace or Relocate Poles Where a third party requests the Licensee to Transfer or Rearrange its Attachments as a result of a request to remove, replace or relocate poles, the Licensee shall resolve any issues with respect to costs with the third party. (c) Third Party Requests for Attachment Where the Licensee or HONetworks is required to Transfer or Rearrange its Attachments or attachments respectively to accommodate a third party, the costs associated therewith shall be the responsibility of the third party. (d) HONetworks' Requirement Where a Transfer of the Licensee's Attachment(s) and HONetworks' attachments is involved in the replacement of Joint Use Poles due solely to the requirements of HONetworks, the Licensee and HONetworks shall bear the cost for the Transfer of the Licensee's Attachments and HONetworks' attachments respectively. 13.4 Extra Space - Replacement of Joint Use Poles: (a) HONetworks' Requirement Where extra space is required solely for HONetworks' purposes or as a result of requirements of a governing body with respect to HONetworks' attachments only, the existing Joint Use Pole shall be replaced at the sole expense of HONetworks. Each party shall bear the cost for the Transfer of its own Attachments respectively. Where the space occupied by the Attachments of the.Licensee causes HONetworks to replace a Joint Use Pole with a higher Joint Use Pole to accommodate additional HONetworks attachments, then the Licensee shall pay the costs incurred by HONetworks to replace the Joint Use Pole. These costs will include an amount equal to the value of the existing Joint Use Pole, the cost of Transferring HONetworks' existing attachments (for example, equipment, regulator or recloser installations and switches) to the new Joint Use Pole and the cost of transferring the Licensee's own Attachments. (b) Licensee's Requirement Where extra space is required solely for the Licensee's purposes, or as a result of the requirements of a governing body with respect to the Licensee's Attachments only, the Licensee shall pay HONetworks' costs to supply and install the new Joint Use Pole and the costs to Transfer HONetworks' attachments. to —227— COUNCIL — JULY 13, 2004 (c) Both parties Where extra space is required by both parties, the Licensee shall pay to HONetworks a sum equal to one half of the costs of installing a new Joint Use Pole. The Licensee and HONetworks shall be responsible for the Transfer of the Licensee's Attachments and HONetworks' attachments respectively and the costs associated therewith. (d) Pole Replacements In order to facilitate Joint Use Pole replacements, the Licensee or designated contractor may be required to .attend during pole replacement to make any necessary Transfers at the same time. (e) Reserving extra space HONetworks agrees to provide the Licensee with the opportunity to reserve extra space for its Attachments on the Joint Use poles during the design phase of placing, replacing or upgrading the Joint Use Poles, provided that prior to the commencement of construction, the Licensee confirms its agreement to pay HONetworks for the costs associated with the said extra space thirty days after issuance of an invoice therefor by HONetworks. The said invoice shall be issued by HONetworks after completion of construction. 13.5 Inter -spaced Poles Where a Joint Use Pole is added (interspaced) to an existing line of Joint Use Poles for the sole requirements of the Licensee, the cost of such new Joint Use Pole as well as HONetworks' attachment costs shall be paid by the Licensee. This new Joint Use Pole shall be the property of HONetworks. The applicable Pole Rental Rate shall be paid by the Licensee and the existing Permit shall be modified by the Licensee in both cases no later than 30 days after the Joint Use Pole is added. If the interspaced pole is required by both parties, it shall be installed by HONetworks, material and installation charges will be shared equally by both parties and each party will bear its own attachment costs. 13.6 Emergency Transfer of Attachments From time to time HONetworks is required to perform work under emergency conditions to restore power. In these instances, the reconstruction of the poles can involve the transfer of the Licensee's Attachments to complete the work at the location. Under emergency conditions, HONetworks shall transfer the Attachments of the Licensee and invoice the Licensee for the associated costs and the Licensee shall pay said costs when due. 13.7 Written Cost Estimates and Invoicing: Unless otherwise specifically provided herein, when HONetworks performs work which expense is to be borne in whole or in part by the Licensee, HONetworks, prior to performing the work, will prepare and provide the Licensee with a written cost estimate for labour, materials and miscellaneous expenses. When the written cost estimate is signed and returned to HONetworks, such estimate is considered a valid purchase order and shall form the basis for invoicing. Upon completion of the work, an invoice is rendered and becomes due and payable within sixty (60) days of issuance of the invoice. 11 —228— COUNCIL — JULY 13, 2004 All invoices that are not paid by the relevant due date shall bear late payment interest charges at the prevailing late payment rate, currently 1.5% per month. 12 —229— COUNCIL — JULY 13, 2004 Division of Costs - Summary, Decision Table 13 TYPE OF WORK REASON FOR WORK I PARTY PAYING Supply and install pole Provide pole for HONetworl& HONetworks rannirements Joint planning re: new lines or joint coordination and each party pays for own re -located lines I previews I engineering services Design time if requested by Licensee Licensee Estimates by HONetworks for Licensee's make ready Licensee Application for Licensed Caused by Licensee's new or Licensee Occupancy of Poles form — revised Application review and approval by HONetworks Rearrange each party's Caused by Licensee Licensee attachments Rearrange each party's caused by HONetworks each party pays for its own attachments costs to Rearrange Pole top extension Required for Licensee Licensee Crossarm Required for Licensee Licensee Replace existing JU pole Licensee's requirement Licensee Interspaced JU pole Licensee's requirement Licensee Interspaced JU pole HONetworks requirement each party bears own costs third party requirement per Licensee's 3.d party agreement Pole removal Ceasing Joint Use by HONetworks HONetworks Remove Licensee's pole removal Licensee Attachments Replacement of pole with Vehicle/storm damagej': each party bears own costs of existing Attachments deterioration transfers Replacement of pole with HONetworks' requirement, each party bears own costs existing Attachments 3rd party requirement per respective 3`d party agreement Single pole replaced or added Common crossing for Licensee in non joint use line Licensee Attaching, Transfer or Accommodation of Licensee's Licensee Rearrange HONetworks Attachments Attach, Transfer or Rearrange HONetworks attachments HONetworks request I each party pays own costs to Transfer its attachments Remove safety hazards safety requirement I party creating hazard Make ready Line Clearing for Licensee's attachments I Licensee Maintenance Line Clearing Routine Line Clearing Licensee contributes in Pole Rental Rate New Connection Licensee's requirement Licensee Request for additional space To reserve space on new construction Licensee 13 —230— COUNCIL — JULY 13, 2004 14.0 LINE CLEARING 14.1 HONetworks shall carry out Line Clearing determined to be necessary for maintenance purposes on Joint Use Poles. 14.2 The Licensee's monetary contribution towards maintenance Line Clearing of Joint Use Poles which is incorporated in the Pole Rental Rate is based upon and recognizes the following: (a) HONetworks' incremental costs to maneuver in and around the Licensee's Attachments as part of maintenance Line Clearing around Joint Use Poles. (b) HONetworks' removal and clean-up of storm damaged trees along a line of Joint Use Poles. (c) Maintenance Line Clearing reduces costs for new or added Attachments. (d) Licensee's input and influence in the local Line Clearing program to meet joint requirements when feasible. (e) Joint interest in maintaining the integrity of HONetworks' neutral along a line of Joint Use Poles from tree -related damage. 14.3 The costs involved in make-ready Line Clearing determined by HONetworks as necessary to be carried out on Joint Use Poles shall be shared as follows: (a) Where Joint Use is to be established on existing HONetworks' poles or existing Joint Use Poles must be replaced for said purpose, all make-ready Line Clearing costs shall be borne by the Licensee. Tenders may be called by the Licensee and contracts may be awarded to HONetworks or to qualified forestry contractors for any make-ready Line Clearing required by the Licensee provided the work is done in compliance with HONetworks' Line Clearing specifications and the work is on a public road allowance. If HONetworks performs the make-ready Line Clearing, the costs for the make-ready Line Clearing shall be paid by the Licensee within 60 days of the date of the invoice issued by HONetworks therefor. (b) Where new Joint Use is to be created or an existing line of Joint Use Poles is re -located, make ready Line Clearing shall be performed by HONetworks. Notice shall be provided to the Licensee along with the estimate of the costs of the make-ready Line Clearing work to be performed. The cost of such Line Clearing for the new Joint Use Poles shall be shared 75% by HONetworks and 25% by the Licensee as will be provided for in an invoice to be issued by HONetworks. The Licensee shall pay the said costs to HONetworks within 60 days of the date of the invoice issued by HONetworks therefor. 15.0 LINE CLEARING PROGRAM 15.1 The following specifications are a standard for Line Clearing that shall be applied to all Joint Use Poles. Approved arboricultural practices shall be followed while still assuring plant safety and reliability. 14 —231— COUNCIL — JULY 13, 2004 (a) Trees are to be pruned sufficiently to provide clearances with adequate provision to reach the next maintenance Line Clearing cycle, giving due consideration to tree species, growth, planned clearing cycles and location. (b) All pruner and saw cuts are to be made using the natural target pruning technique. All cuts will be made by drop crotch pruning to a lateral or parent limb, which should be at least one-third the diameter of the limb being removed. (c) Pruner and saw cuts need not be painted with tree wound dressing unless otherwise specified by HONetworks' Forestry representative. (d) All brush is to be removed from the site and disposed of appropriately. 16.0 PERMITS AND SAFETY AUDITS: 16.1 At such time as deemed necessary by HONetworks, Joint Use Poles will be audited by HONetworks or mutually, if agreed, in order: (a) To detect and subsequently correct all deficiencies within ninety (90) days or sooner except Hazardous Conditions which, except as otherwise specified in the Agreement or the CAG, in the case of an emergency require correction within thirty (30) days; (b) To confirm that Joint Use is properly authorized by Permit; and (c) To confirm the accuracy of Pole Rental Rates being charged. 16.2 Subject to the following, where an audit is carried out by both parties simultaneously, each party shall bear its own respective costs associated with the audit. Should an audit reveal that the number of unauthorized Attachments exceeds 2% of the number of Joint Use Poles for which Permits have been granted, then the Licensee will pay HONetworks' labour costs associated with the audit as well as applicable back rent for unauthorized Attachments as set out in the Agreement. 16.3 The Licensee will be responsible for making application and obtaining all permits required from the Electrical Safety Association and HONetworks for occupancy on the Joint Use Poles and for the connection of power. 16.4 The installation of any third party attachments other than those of the Road Authority or Municipality will require municipal approval prior to installation. Any such attachment made will be under the care and control of the Municipality and will follow the conditions outlined in the License and CAG. 15 —232— COUNCIL - JULY 13, 2004 APPENDIX 1 dr one APPLICATION FOR LICENSED OCCUPANCY OF POLES NOTE, The Licensee agrees that all connected flat rate load information will be shared with the Licensee's energy supplier for the purpose of ensuring accurate energy billing. *Please complete all boxes above the dotted line. to be attached to and form part of the Agreement effective: Licensee'sject name/refer # R0A-bA1,+roLLd° IN ifarv-6A vt&Wl -7 Super a es Permit No. or"New" W Permission is requested by Signed; Print Name and title: r h4V Qt�./'T��p��l' b authorized A thori or Mun.m .%f�EC1C/� C%F f �/6o, k✓�%��CS to place attachments as follows: (note specific quantity, size and nature of proposed attachment(s)) 26 Attachments for Street Lighting (150 W 11PS Luminaires and Bracket Arms) at Poles AP7, AP9, AP12, AP14,'AP16, AP19, AP21, P22, AP24, AP30, AP32, AP34; AP37, AP39, AP42, AP44, AP46, P48, AP48, AP50r AP53, AP55, AP57, AP59, AP61, AP63. 26 Attachments for Street Lighting Cable (Aerial) on samples as Desired Construction Target lot nos. (in or between) Cone./street or road names Township/village or town of county/municipality -- Fe liq lVE�z-(11valTIV TufN OF �illeo F �RiC i� (T\ 1 St. ,WNN'S t�ttpfj __ SIeFAOAU q . � Mlnnun 3Hen belos Neutret � m X .. - mbLnun a0 [n above ar beta- eannunlcatlon Strand (CArV) WOLNCrpN ST. - must Maintain 2.4 n frm phase to Nevtraf Sht eontral Wire _ M1 C.K. TV Alternitfe Hell Canada Lo4wtbp . Please orient sketch to the north, show occasional HONetworks transformer numbers and adjacent Permit 'numbers- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 1 - - _ _ _ _ _ - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Approved (HONetworks) Legend X =Rental Pole No. of full rental poles 0� Name and Title (please print) Operations manager or designate: Operations/ Front Line Manager Operations Centre Permit no. Brockville SC Date Other internal project YES NO -2133- COUNCIL — JULY 13, 2004 SCHEDULE"B" APPLICATION FOR LICENSED OCCUPANCY OF POLES NOTE: The Licensee agrees that all connected flat rate load information will be shared with the Licensee's energy supplier for the purpose of ensuring accurate energy billing. *Please complete all boxes above the dotted line. to be attached to and form part of the Agreement effective: Licensee's project name/refer # Supercedes Permit No. or "New" Permission is requested by Signed: Print Name and title: to place attachments as follows: (note specific quantity, size and nature of proposed attachment(s)) Desired Construction Target lot nos. (in ar between) Conc./street or road names Township/village or town of county/municipality * Please orient sketch to the north, show occasional HONetworks transformer numbers and adjacent Permit numbers - -- Approved (HONetworks) Legend No. of full rental poles Name and Title (please print) Operations manager or designate: Operations Centre Permitno. Date Other internal project —2314— COUNCIL - JULY 13, 2004 N d to O g m� W 42 c O w R 42 Z w J i O v W O O m y U) n m 0 a� ro ro w n � 7 m LL O � � Q Ul O X LL L M Q Z N Q 0 o m 2p T D N ro O O Z >,-O N ro 0 E 6 0 O en Z — N T F-' N X LL Y Q Zi E L C O �U m m -235- COUNCIL - JULY 13, 2004 :I; TOWNOFAURORR AGENDA ITEM # 13 COUNCIL REPORT No. PW04-033 SUBJECT: Results of Tender for reconstruction of St. John's Sideroad between Yonge Street and Bayview Avenue FROM: W. H. Jackson, Director of Public Works DATE: July 13, 2004 RECOMMENDATIONS THAT.Report No. PW04-033 regarding various matters related to the reconstruction of St. John's Sideroad be received as information; THAT staff. - engage an outside consultant to undertake a peer review of the need and, if necessary, alternative locations and construction methodology for the Town's watermain on St. John's Sideroad from Old Yonge Street to Industrial Parkway North; and • report back as soon as practicable on the results of this peer review. THAT with respect to the St. John's Sideroad reconstruction tender, the Regional Municipality of York. be requested to implement the approved design for the Town's sidewalk (including boardwalk and irrigation), bikeway and illumination; and • be informed of Council's decision in the matter of the Town's watermain. THAT additional funds as described in Report No. PW04-033 be approved from the Development Charges Reserve for the construction of the sidewalk (including boardwalk and associated irrigation), bikeway and illumination on St. John's Sideroad; and THAT staff be requested to report to Council on the necessaryprocess to amend the 2004 budget and update the Development Charges By-law to reflect the tender prices as described in Report No. PW04-033. -236- COUNCIL — JULY 13, 2004 13, 2004 - 2 - Report No. PW04-033 BACKGROUND The initial allocation of Town funds for the installation of sidewalks, bikeways, illumination, and watermain as part of the reconstruction of St. John's Sideroad from Yonge Street to Bayview Avenue were included in the 2001 Capital Budget (see attached Appendix "A"). Funds were also included in the 2003 Capital Budget (see attached Appendix "B") for the construction of a boardwalk on the sides of the road as it passes through the Mckenzie Marsh and additional funds were authorized by Council at its meeting of September 23, 2003 for the watermain construction and consultant work. Due to various delays, the original project tender closed mid April 2004. Unfortunately there were no bidders and subsequently the project was re -tendered with a mid June 2004 closing. For this second tender, 4 firms submitted bids. COMMENTS 1.. General There are two major components of Town works in the St. John's Sideroad reconstruction contract each of which is described below: 1.1 Sidewalk (including Boardwalk and Irrigation)/Bikeway/Illumination This part of the project includes the construction of sidewalks along both sides of the street, an asphalt bikepath along one side of the road, and streetlighting from Yonge Street to Bayview Avenue, including decorative lighting through the McKenzie Marsh (the "Marsh"). The sidewalk through the Marsh will take the form of a boardwalk. In -ground irrigation will be installed to assist in landscaping maintenance. The approved budget for these works is $881,500 and the DC By-law specifies funds in the amount of $874,000 for these items. The tendered costs are $931,739, including 5% contract administration costs but excluding GST. These items are funded 90%from DC charges and accordingly, the amount to be covered by DC funding is $838,565.10. The additional $93,173.90 will be covered from the Cash -in -Lieu of Parkland account ($30,000), a Nokiidaa Trail Contribution ($25,000) and the remaining $38,173.90 from the 2001 Capital Budget Current Levy. 1.2 Watermain This portion of the project includes the construction of a large diameter watermain —237— COUNCIL — JULY 13, 2004 July 13, 2004 - 3 - Report No. PW04-033 along St. John's Sideroad between Old Yonge Street and Industrial Parkway North, to fill in a missing link in the Town's grid of trunk watermains. This work was originally estimated to cost $455,500 in the 2001 Capital Budget, however, Council increased this budget to $615,500 in September 2003. Although the funding forthis watermain will come 100% from Development Charges, and in spite of the increased budget noted above, the recently updated DC By-law contains funds only in the amount of $462,665 for this project. The tender cost forthis watermain is $1,134,029.13 and accordingly, if the project is to proceed, the DC quantum forthis item will have to be increased by $671,364,13. 2. Apparent Reasons for Price Overage The overall reconstruction project is significantly over budget and consequently both Town and Regional staff have looked closely at possible reasons why there is such a discrepancy between the estimated and tendered costs. Although we cannot know for certain the bidder's thoughts when preparing their bids, there are likely a number of contributing factors to the higher than expected costs such as: - This is a unique project that will be difficult to construct; - There are strict deadlines set out in the contract specifying when the contractor can be working in certain areas and what must be accomplished within each area and time period. The time constraints as established by the environmental approvals will minimize the disruption to traffic flows along the street, and accommodate the construction methodologies necessary to construct the works; - There were no bidders when the project was originally tendered, which likely caused the bidders on the second tender to inflate their prices somewhat; - Although the design consultant has not recently worked on other projects for the Town, they have done so for the Region and Region staff have advised that the consultant's construction cost estimates have been substantially lower than the tendered prices on a number of projects. Another factor that likely influenced the prices for a number of parts of the project through the Marsh area is the potential requirement for dewatering. These include the Town's watermain, a section of Regional sanitary sewer that is being reconstructed, the base of one of the retaining walls and both of the culverts that cross the road. As part of the tender process for the second tender, the Region held a "Bidder's Meeting" and one of the main concerns raised by potential bidders was dewatering and whether a Permit to Take Water would be required for the project. As a result, the Region commissioned a supplementary —238— COUNCIL — JULY 13, 2004 July 13, 2004 - 4 - Report No. PW04-033 report from their geotechnical sub -consultant the conclusions of which were that there would probably not be enough dewatering required to require a Permit to Take Water (the threshold amount is 50,000 I/day) however, the contractor would have to take special measures to ensure that the amount of water entering the excavation(s) did not exceed that minimum limit. It is believed that this did not alleviate the contractors concerns regarding this issue entirely. To ensure it was not just the Town that was exposed to the higher tendered costs, we reviewed the cost of the Region's proposed sewer through the Marsh. For this section of sewer, the estimated cost was $780,000 compared to the tendered cost of $1.16m. In fact, the entire roads portion of this project is over budget by $2.34m (total tendered price is $10.78m). It was apparent from this information that the higher tendered costs occurred consistently across the road portion of the project and in particular in the area of the Marsh. 3. Need for Watermain to be Constructed Although, given the above, there is some rational for the increased cost and it is apparent that the higher costs are related to the Marsh area and not solely the Town's works, because of the magnitude of the tender price, staff wanted to ensure there is an absolute need for the watermain. Consequently, our hydraulic flow -modelling consultant was requested to critically review the need for the section of watermain between Old Yonge Street and Industrial Parkway North. Our consultant noted that under normal operating conditions, we could continue to "get by" without completing the above noted connection. By way of further explanation, the consultant noted that the system would be stressed without this link during periods of fire flow and flushing operations because there is little spare capacity or redundancy to meet these higher flows. The need for redundancy (security of supply) will heighten as more people and businesses move into the St. John's Sideroad/Bayview area of Town. As was pointed out by the consultant, the main on Old Yonge Street is the only large supply main in this area and is a critical component which cannot be taken out of service, under the existing set-up, without significantly reducing fire flow capacity in the local area. Our Operations staff also expressed a need for this connecting link because of present problems they experience in the Willow Farm area when flushing the Yonge Street/St. John's Sideroad area. We expect this problem Will be exacerbated in the future if the Region draws water up to Newmarket without the subject missing link on St. John's Sideroad. Lastly, it is noted that all the development east of Industrial Parkway North is reliant on only the feed up Industrial Parkway North to provide the northern loop. If this Industrial Parkway North watermain needs to be taken out of service than all of the development east of —239— COUNCIL — JULY 13, 2004 July 13, 2004 - 5 - Report No. PW04-033 Industrial Parkway North and north of Wellington Street East will be fed from only the Wellington Street watermain. 4. Alternative Construction Options Based on the previous discussion, the need for this section of watermain was reaffirmed. Consequently, staff investigated alternative construction methods or location. The following alternatives had been examined during the design work forthe present alignment, however, we took a second look to ensure the best alternative is being presented. 4.1 Construct Watermain Later as a Separate Contract One option is to pull this work completely from the Region's contract and do it at a later date by a contractor working directly for the Town. This option would likely require the Town to wait until at least January 2008, after the warranty period for the St. John's reconstruction project is finished, before the Region would allow us to do work on their road. Underthis option, there would be no possibility of constructing the watermain using the normal cut -and -cover construction methodology as there would be no room in the boulevards for the Town to place the watermain and the Region would not allow the Town to excavate the new road to place the main under the road. The methodology, therefore, for this alternative is to install the watermain using Horizontal Directional Drilling (HDD) technology. The watermain could be drilled either under the Marsh itself or could be placed deep under the road underneath the bottom of the retaining walls that are being installed as part of the road reconstruction. The main constraints for this alternative are the facts that the two end points are fixed and we have to cross a marsh area and railway tracks. At this time, drilling under the tracks is not permitted and accordingly, our construction methodologyfor the track crossing could not be HDD. This alternative has been used in otherjurisdictions for the size of pipe we are using although, the unit cost in 1998 for a similar operation was almost 50% higher than our tendered prices. Based on the above, plus the fact we would need a new design with extensive geotechnical work as well as new approvals via the environmental process led us to the conclusion that HDD is not the technology to use for the subject section of watermain. —240— COUNCIL — JULY 13, 2004 July 13, 2004 - 6 - Report No. PW04-033 4.2 Construct Watermain in Alternative Location St. John's Sideroad in the area of the proposed watermain is essentially surrounded by Marsh. Therefore, moving the watermain to the immediate north or south of St. John's Sideroad will not alter the conclusions of Section 4.1. Moving the watermain further south creates two main problems. The first problem is that south of the Marsh, the lands are developed so that a watermain connection would require property, or easement, acquisition so that we could drill beneath existing structures. More importantly however, the existing watermains that we could connect to south of the Marsh are too small to provide the volume and hydraulics to satisfy the purpose of the proposed watermain. In consideration of the above, there do not appear to be viable alternatives to the proposed watermain location. 5. Discussion All of the above examinations and reviews have been undertaken, for the most part, in- house with minimal input from outside third parties. Although our review points to the need to construct the watermain, in consideration of the significant costs it would be prudent, in our opinion, to undertake a peer review of this matter. Discussions with Regional representatives have indicated that a final decision on the construction of the watermain must be made no later than early September 2004. This leaves a short period of time to engage an outside consultant to review the need for the watermain, and if the decision is still that this pipe is required then the consultant could look into alternative locations and construction methodologies. We believe the cost of this review would not be more than $25,000 funds for which are available in the self-sustaining water account. There is insufficient time to deal with requests for proposals or ask for quotations and therefore, if Council is agreeable to this suggested review, staff propose to assign the task direct to an appropriate consulting firm. The intention is that staff will come back to Council at the August meeting or early September to provide further information on the matter of the watermain. It is noted that the Region intends to award the contract for the tendered amounts within a week or two. If it is ultimately decided to withdraw the Town's watermain from this contract, Council should understand that there might be repercussions in the form of a claim from the contractor. —241— COUNCIL — JULY 13, 2004 July 13, 2004 - 7 - Report No. PW04-033 OPTIONS With respect to the watermain along St. John's Sideroad, a number of options have been considered in this report including the "null" alternative of not constructing the subject watermain. Although the present design is significantly over budget, the alternatives either leave the Town with an incomplete water network and the corresponding danger of system failure during critical times or the uncertainly that we could undertake a great deal of additional design work and end up paying more than the present tender. As an option, Council could forego the proposed peer review and direct staff to requestthe Region to construct the subject water and prepare an update to the DC By-law to include the necessary additional funds for this pipe. FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS The specifics of the funding arrangements for the various Town elements included in the St. John's Sideroad reconstruction are included in Sections 1.1 and 1.2. Funding for the watermain comes 100% from Development Charges. The tendered price, however, is significantly more than that which is provided for in the existing Development Charge By-law. Depending on the outcome of the proposed peer review, or if directed by Council, a review of the Development Charge By-law may be required in the near future so that actual instead of estimated costs can be used. It is noted that by the end of 2004, major Public Works Development Charge projects (Henderson Drive, Bayview Avenue, infrastructure for the Whitwell/State Farm development,) and Leisure Services projects (Recreation Centre, Seniors Centre) will have been tendered so that much more accurate cost information can be included in the DC By-law. CONCLUSIONS The reconstruction of St. John's Sideroad includes a significant component of Town works. The tendered costs have come in significantly over the estimated costs for certain components of our work and accordingly, it is felt that the prudent course of action is to continue with those parts of the project that are within budget and to review in greater detail that part of the project (Town watermain) that is over budget so that Council will have the benefit of a third party opinion upon which to base its decision. LINK TO STRATEGIC PLAN Goal "A" speaks to maintaining a well -managed and fiscally responsible municipality. —242— COUNCIL — JULY 13, 2004 July 13, 2004 - 8 - Report No. PW04-033 ATTACHMENTS • Appendix "A" — Capital Budget Sheet from 2001 Budget • Appendix "B" — Capital Budget Sheet from 2003 Budget PRE -SUBMISSION REVIEW Management Team Meeting — July 7, 2004 Prepared by. W, H. Jackson, Director of Public Works, Ext. 4371 / • /Y < W. H. Ja Director of Public Works —243— COUNCIL — JULY 13, 2Appendix A TOWN OF AURORA 2001 CAPITAL BUDGET' ANALYM BY FROJECT DEPARTMENT: Public worics Depu'm2em Cnnsattction of-CA&Walk. 10uminsdon. and Wacenaasns an St. John's PROJECT: SQL to Bamew Avenue Sideroad. Yoage To provide for the provision of sidewalks sad MurnivadOn. and the construction gR1POSE: of berecoospucdoo, of St_ John's Sidetnad by the • of w-un�^—v as Pm= Region of Yank • ; as� : ear n t t� . ►. u To provide increased levels of service to residents tdg 700m to the existing water construction of this waternsain will add appre distribution network CTO�F 'Tr TiF OPERATIZ001 2002 2003 INCREASE(DECREASE) sm SALARIES SSOo OTHER COSTS 111000 TOTAL 4. j na OEcl P( 5LaF AN NG .., ac TOTAL PROJECT COST 51,043,000 iTld IiNCING : S58,700 CURRENT LEVY GRANTS RESERVE F1.'ND • (Speeifs t sm m OTHER TOTAL FINANCING 51.043.000 �r Reserve Fund Dcvelopmeru Charge Rrservo (S455.500 for waterrmin and S528.800 for stdewalks and illumrrtauon) The Regron's cvrtcnt scncdule is to tend= this project in ute 2001, with constnsctton occurring in 2002. so thu the Town can tumfum to These montos wtil net m spent thus year. but must tee allocated in 2001 the Retton trut mese nems are to be =iudcd in ttt2r4V=- COUNCIL — JULY 13, 2004 Appendix B TOWN OF AURORA 2003 CAPITAL BUDGET ANALYSIS BY PROJECT Department Priority: a LSAC Priority: t% DEPARTMENT: Leisure Services Department ACCOUNT N.O. PROJECT: St. John's Sideroad Trail/Board NValk To implement continuation of the Town's Trail System/Nokiidaa Trail. iRFORb1ANCE/ACTIVITY MEASURES ICREASE(DECREASE To increase recreational trail opportunities in the Town of Aurora. FFECT ON FUTURE OPERATING BUDGETS NCREASE(DECREASE) ALARIES )THER COSTS PROJECT COST/FINANCING IOTA PRO: FINANCING: CURRENT LEVY GRANTS RESERVE FUND • Development Charges Reserve OTHER - Nokiidaa Trail Contribution Cash -In -Lieu of Parkland TOTAL FINANCING EXPLANATIONS/HIGHLIGHTS: Elevated board walk proposed to be constructed on the north side of St.John's Sideroad in conjunctio with the Region of York St. John Sideroad widening project. Approximately 350linearmetres of tra /board walk is required In this area to safely cross the McKenzie Marsh. This important section ottra will connect the entire northlsouth Nokiidaa Trail from the Vandorf Road in the south to the Town t Newmarket boarder in the north. -245— COUNCIL — JULY 13, 2004 taTOWN OF AURORA COUNCIL REPORT AGENDA ITEM # I q No. PW04-034 SUBJECT: Award of Tender No. PW 2004-40, Removal and Replacement of Concrete Sidewalk, Curb and Gutterat various locations in the Town of Aurora FROM: W. H. Jackson, Director of Public Works DATE: July 13, 2004 RECOMMENDATIONS THAT Tender No. PW 2004-40, Removal and Replacement of Concrete Sidewalk, Curb and Gutter at various locations in the Town of Aurora be awarded to Lima's Gardens and Construction Inc. at the tendered price of $49,717.70 (excluding GST); THAT Council authorize staff to expend funds under this tender to the budgeted amount of $60,000 (excluding GST); and THAT Council authorize the Mayor and Municipal Clerk to execute the attached Form of Agreement between the Town of Aurora and Lima's Gardens and Construction Inc. BACKGROUND Council approved as part of the 2004 Public Works Operating Budget the removal and replacement of concrete sidewalk, curb and gutterthat was found to be deficient in annual inspections within the Town. This work is performed on an annual basis and is part of the ongoing maintenance and inspection programs within Public Works. COMMENTS 1. Project Description The areas for replacement under this Tender were generated from visual inspections following the council approved Public Works policy guidelines and inspection criteria forthe removal and replacement of deficient concrete sidewalk, curb and gutter. The areas listed in the Tender were found to require immediate replacement under the above inspection criteria. —246— COUNCIL — JULY 13, 2004 July 13, 2004 - 2 - Report No. PW04-034 2. Tender Process This project was tendered on June 21, 2004 and on July 5, 2004 the Tender Opening Committee opened two Tenders with the following prices: TENDERER I TENDER PRICE (Excluding GST) Lima's Gardens & Construction Inc. $49,717.70 Forest Contractor's Ltd. $55,456.00 The Tender was issued by the Town's Treasury Department and advertised according to the requirements of the Town's standard purchasing procedures. OPTIONS Council may not wish to proceed with this contract although that may leave the Town at risk to liability from personal injury claims that may arise from the noted deficiencies. FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS Sufficient funds ($60,000) have been allocated in the 2004 Public Works Operational Budget for these sidewalk and curb repairs. For Council's further information, GST funds in the amount of $3,480.24 will also be paid and recovered for this project. CONCLUSIONS The submission from Lima's Garden's and Construction Inc. met all the Tender requirements and was the lowest responsive bidder. Staff has received a favourable reference from the City of Toronto regarding Lima's performance. LINK TO STRATEGIC PLAN Goal A speaks to maintaining a well -managed and fiscally responsible municipality. ATTACHMENTS • Appendix "A" - Form of Agreement — Tender PWO04-40 PRE -SUBMISSION REVIEW Management Team Meeting — July 7, 2004 ' Prepared by Brad Schonauer, Roads/ Traffic Supervisor, Ext. 3444 //. "— W. H. Jac Director of Public Works —247— 2004 11:23 9058512182 LIMAS GARDENS & CONS PAGE e1 "COUNCIL — JULY 13, 2004 PART 3 Appendix A FORM OF AGREEMENT THE CORPORATION OF THE TOWN OF AURORA PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT TENDER NO. P.W. 2004.40 ?'HIS AGREEMENT made (in triplicate) this r1-, day of UI AD 200q BETWEEN: The Corporation of the Town of Aurora hereinafter called the "OWNER* of the First Part and :l HA IS i7F1't pgN 5 -k C.o K'r' e-U GY 121N f NG hereinafter called the "CONTRACTOR" of the Second Part HEREA5 the Tender of the Contractor respecting the construction work, hereinafter referred to and described, as accepted by the Owner on the .THEREFORE THE 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 July 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 2. The Contractor further covenants and agrees to undertake and perform the said work in a properwork 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. 3. The'Contractor further covenant's and agrees that the Contractor will at all times, 'ndemsaify 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. film, W. I] —248— 07/08/200,1 11:23 90F3512182 LIMAS GARDENS & CONS FH t b2 CO.UNC I L - JULY 13, 2004 Tender P.W: 2004-40 2 4, The Contractor further covenants and agrees to furnish in accordance with the above specifica(lon, 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 ,scxordance with the terms of this Agreement. 5. 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 Contractorshail carry out, perform and observe all of the requi.raments 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. (3. This agreement and everything herein contained shall ensure to the benefit of and be binding upon the Parties hereto, their successors and assigns, respectively. ' - 7. All communications in writing between the parties or between them and the Engineer shalt be deemed to have been received by the addressee if delivered to the Individual or to a member of the firm orto 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 6,11 FAX: 905-727-7616 THE CONTRACTOR: \n)C0 1b(4 r! C)W f.RE () L4 A 1Gl1 FAX: 21�a.-. IN WITNIES Wt&REOF the parties hereto have hereunto affixed their corporate seals duly attested by tho hands of their proper officers in that behalf respectively. CONTRACTOR OWNER �JkQ rcc <� LtHi- , Mayor, T. Jones r"ta iaENT ,Clerk, Bob Panizza, A.M.C.T, -249- COUNCIL — JULY 13, 2004 TOWN OF AURORA COUNCIL REPORT No. ADM04-016 SUBJECT: Request for Land Exchange Terra Aurora Inc. (Avant Imaging and Information Management Inc.) 205 Industrial Parkway North, Aurora FROM: J. Van Scheyndel, Law Clerk DATE: July 13, 2004 RECOMMENDATIONS THAT By-law 4405-03.D being a by-law to prescribe the form, mannerand time for the provision of notice be hereby waived to allow public notice of the proposed exchange of public lands to be given 12 days prior to the action being taken as opposed to 14 days; THAT the Mayor and Clerk be authorized to execute the Offer to Purchase Agreements and the Option to Purchase Agreements between the Town and Terra Aurora Inc.; THAT By-law 4559-04.L, being a by-law to acquire certain lands described as Part of Lot 87, Plan 246, Part 3, 65R-27176 be enacted; and THAT By-law 4560-04.L, being a by-law to convey certain lands described as Part of Lot 87, Plan 246, Parts 1 and 2, 65R-27176 be enacted. BACKGROUND The owner of the lands municipally known as 205 Industrial Parkway North, Aurora, Terra Aurora Inc. (hereinafter the "Owner"), currently leases its lands to Avant Imaging and Information Management Inc. (AIIM) for industrial purposes. On March 9, 2004 the Town received a request from Weston Consulting Group Inc., on behalf of the Owner, to purchase a 0.21 acre portion of the Town's adjoining land in orderto improve the access and circulation of vehicles to the rear of their south industrial building. If approved, the Owner proposes to expand the north building and relocate AIIM from the south to the north building; and demolish the glass corridor link connecting the existing north and south buildings, thereby facilitating the marketing of the south building as available industrial space to attract a new industrial user on the site. In compensation for the proposed purchase, the Owner would convey to the Town a strip of their land, equal in size, along the east side of their property abutting Lambert Wilson Park. —250— COUNCIL — JULY 13, 2004 Julv 13. 2004 - 2 - Report No. ADM04-016 COMMENTS Site plan approval for the proposed 72,000 sq. ft. expansion will be required. The proposed Option to Purchase Agreements state that if the Owner does not subsequently obtain a building permit for the works within two years of the sale, or if the Owner is not issued a final occupancy permit within four years of the sale, both the Town and the Owner will have the option to reverse the land exchange. The nearby laneway (north entrance to Lambert Wilson Park) currently used to access Baseball Diamond No. 4 would not be affected by the proposed conveyance. An easement in favour of the Town for the trunk and storm sewer located within the lands to be conveyed would be reserved through the sale and would not impact the proposed redevelopment of the site. Public notice of the proposed land exchange was published in the local newspaper on July 1 and 6, 2004. Administration Procedure No. 55 — Real Estate Sales, Purchases and Leases exempts the Town from placing properties included in a land exchange for sale on the open market. The Town is also exempt, under the Municipal Act, from its obligations to obtain an appraisal where the subject land does not have direct access to a highway if sold to the owner of land abutting the land. OPTIONS If Council chooses to: • waive the Notice By-law and approve the land exchange, the Town's easement will be reserved through the sale and the Town would have an option to reverse the land exchange if the industrial expansion does not proceed; deny the request to waive the Notice By-law and consider the land exchange at a future meeting so that the full 14 days public notice can be provided instead of the 12 days, the closing dates, etc. set out in the Offer to Purchase Agreements and the Option to Purchase Agreements will need to be extended a further 30 to 45 days due to the delay in Council's ability to consider this matter during the summer meeting schedule; or • deny the request for the land exchange, the Owner would be unable to achieve the improved access required to proceed with the proposed expansion of the existing industrial facility located on their property. FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS Although the lands would be conveyed for nominal consideration, the Town would ultimately benefit from the Owner's payment of development charges (approximately —251— COUNCIL — JULY 13, 2004 July 13, 2004 - 3 - Report No. ADM04-016 $91,800.00) for the proposed 72,000 sq. ft. expansion, as well as benefitfrom an increase in!taxes for the property once the assessed value of the expansion is determined. The Owner would also be responsible to pay all costs associated with the proposed purchase and sale including finalizing a reference plan, administration costs forthe preparation of the proposed purchase and sale and option agreements, and registration costs. CONCLUSIONS The lands to be exchanged are equal in size and either form part of or adjoin a portion of Lambert Wilson park. The Town will reserve the trunk and storm sewer easement it requires through the sale. If the adjoining industrial facility is expanded in the future as proposed, the Town would be eligible to receive development charges as well as benefit from an increased tax base. If the adjoining property is not developed as proposed, both the Town and the Owner would have an option to reverse the land exchange in the future. LINK TO STRATEGIC PLAN Goal A: Maintaining a Well Managed and Fiscally Responsible Municipality Goal C: Continuing Controlled, Well Planned Growth ATTACHMENTS A Reference Plan B March 9, 2004 Request from Weston Consulting on behalf of Terra Aurora Inc. C Offer to Purchase Agreement (Town) D Offer to Purchase Agreement (Terra Aurora Inc.) E Option to Purchase Agreement (Town) F Option to Purchase Agreement (Terra Aurora Inc.) PRE -SUBMISSION REVIEW Management Team — July 7, 2004 Janet Van Scheyndel, Law Clerk Lavkfence Allison Chief Administrative Officer —252— �ulllu(C JULY 13, 2004 ATTACHMENT A Z a g k 6g � �o u \L ,,, I ,, •t aw I � I I I � � I e 0 I I a I I 4 Z i� yy' 00-=a 9 C ¢ Lj a gy 9 Of0Oo o} W laj Z'j d �W Jj � OO U �1.--�liAei cs 0 03 z i E z F- o - 0 W On a tit—n M yp4X_ 9yy "m 3 N I ti 5 3 ONO .. p'cry�SLN fp'13.sr / y UOa�J,��NYPJq a1Wd / T i • a -253- COUNCIL - JULY 13, 2004 ff "l) ATTACHMENT B WESTON CONSULTING GROUP INC. PLANNING CONSULTANTS The Town of Aurora P. O. Box 1000 100 John West Way Aurora, Ontario L4G 6J1 ATTENTION: Mr. Dino Lombardi Economic Development Officer Dear Sir: Re: Proposed Expansion and Associated Land Exchange 205 Industrial Parkway North, Aurora March 9, 2004 WCGI File: 3076 RECEIVED MAR 10 2004 ADMINia l HAVION Weston Consulting Group Inc. is the agent acting on behalf of "Terra Aurora", the owner of 205 Industrial Parkway North, Aurora. Currently, the entire property is used by Avant Imaging and Information Management Inc. (AIIM) for industrial purposes. In December, 2003, a letter was forwarded to Mr. Bob Paniaa, Municipal Clerk regarding a proposed land exchange of two equal land areas comprising approximately 882 square metres (.218 acres) each. The proposed land exchange is intended to "square off' the property to create improved site access,, while at the same time providing lands which can form part of Lambert Wilson Park (sketch attached). The reason that my client is interested in conducting a land exchange is that there is currently a proposal to expand the portion of the building located on the north side of the property, as shown in the attached Site Plan concept. The characteristics of the expansion are as follows: . • Construction of approximately 72,000 square feet of new industrial space comprising manufacturing, warehousing and cafeteria uses, as an addition to the north building; • Demolition of an existing glass corridor link' connecting two buildings; • The majority of the new space will be used by the current occupant, AIIM Group to allow for expansion of the existing industrial operation and to accommodate new state of the art printing equipment; • It is anticipated that the expansion will allow AIIM to expand from it's current 100 employees to approximately 140 employees; 201 MILLWAY AVENUE, UNIT 19, VAUGHAN, ONTARIO, L4K 5K8 TEL: (905) 738-8080 1-800-363-3558 FAX: (905) 738-6637 email: wgeneral@westonconsul8ng.com wwwmes�r Jnr4ansulting.ccm COUNCIL — JULY 13, 2004 • Page 2 March 9, 2004 It is our understanding that the proposed expansion conforms to the Town of Aurora Zoning By-law and would therefore be permitted under current planning permissions, subject to Site Plan Approval. Given the nature of this expansion and my client's desire to undertake an application shortly with a target to begin construction this year, it is respectfully requested that the Town give further consideration to the proposed land exchange as outlined. Thank you for your consideration of this matter. Please do not hesitate to contact me with any comments you may have. Yours truly, Weston Consulting Group Inc. P\ V�r. Mark N. Emery, .Sn Vice President l Cc: M. Giorgio, AIIM —255— COUNCIL - JULY 13, 2004 & �) \// ■ § mwA %)§ : Iop,,( NORTH Fps \� -256- COUNC-I.L_-- J_ULY .1-3,_ .2.004__ __ 11�08138�1fl 5 e a • &i§� AN d obiPE wu aun¢.a o'.,,..� Ansois sio asoaaxa ew•arm�nm Nd10WOUL 1961 d A. ; 9 &I t aaa ata : @f F 1. 8iti ji Yai "fig $§ va::va [�:.IP• �y:y qeqe �.y::: i:::'�C jjlI e e \ x � x :'E3:� [o a = • •9 $ a • a , FIFO � a 'aa ps1Y' - a n r_�yv � �•;+,ar � far s a •a' o . a R Al W A - -257- COUNCIL - JULY 13, 2004 OFFER TO PURCHASE ATTACHMENT C The Corporation of the Town of Aurora (the "Purchaser") offers to purchase from Terra Aurora Inc. (the "Vendor") certain lands in the Town of Aurora, Regional Municipality of York, having an area of approximately 883 in', being Part of Lot 87, Plan 246, further described on Schedule "A" attached hereto (the "Property"), at the purchase price of Two Dollars (Can. $ 2.00) on the following terms: 1. Purchase Price: The Purchaser shall pay Two Dollars (Can. $2.00) on closing, the receipt and sufficiency whereof is hereby acknowledged. Irrevocable: Purchaser agrees that this Agreement shall be irrevocable by the Purchaser until 11:59 a.m. on the 14" day of July, 2004, after which time, if not accepted, this Agreement shall be null and void. Conditions: This Agreement and any resulting contract ofpurchase and sale is subject to the following specific conditions and failing the fulfillment of any one or more of them at or before closing, the Purchaser shall at his sole option have the right to declare this contract, even though accepted, null and void and shall be entitled to the return of all monies paid herein, together with seemed interest: Conditional on Applicable Procedures: The Purchaser shall complete all processes required by applicable legislation, including legislation of the Purchaser, in order to acquire the Property. Such processes shall include holding a public meeting by the Council of the Purchaser to consider acceptance of this Agreement. If within thirty (30) days of the execution of this. Agreement by both parties, such processes are not completed or the Agreement is not accepted by Council, this Agreement shall be at an end, and neither party shall be under any further liability to the other. This condition is included for the sole benefit of the Purchaser, and may be waived at its option by notice in writing to the Vendor, or Vendor's solicitor, given at any time prior to thirty (30) days following the acceptance of this Agreement. The Vendor acknowledges that negotiation ofthis Agreement by the Purchaser's staff shall not prejudice the Purchaser's right to approve this Agreement. b) Conditional on Vendor's Payment of Purchaser's Fees: The Vendor agrees to pay the Purchaser, the Purchaser's administration fee in the amount of Nine Hundred and Seventy -Five Dollars (Cdn. $975.00) upon execution of this Agreement. c) Conditional on Related Offer to Purchase Agreement: The Vendor agrees that this Agreement is conditional upon the Purchaser's approval and subsequent completion of the related Offer to Purchase Agreement between The Corporation of the Town of Aurora as Vendor and Terra Aurora Inc. as Purchaser for the lands described as Part of Lot 87, Plan 246, designated as Parts I and 2, Plan 65R-27176, Town of Aurora, Regional Municipality of York. d) Conditional on Option to Purchase Agreement: The Purchaser and the Vendor agree to enter into Option to Purchase Agreements on or before the date of closing which provide that if the Director of Building Administration for the Town of Aurora, within two (2) years from the date of closing, does not approve the issuance of a building permit in favour of the Vendor over the Vendor's adjoining lands described as Part of Lot 87, Plan 246, designated as Part I on 65R-4573 to permit the constmction of a 72,000 square foot expansion of the north building comprising of warehousing, and cafeteria uses, substantiallyin the form of a sketch attached hereto as Schedule "B", then the lands conveyed pursuant to Section 3 a) above maybe re - conveyed to the Vendor, at the Vendor's expense. Provided that the Vendor has been issued an Occupancy Permit by the Town of Aurora in relation to the above -noted building permit within four (4) years from the Date of Completion, or within such time(s) as may be extended in writing by the Purchaser within its sole discretion, the -258- COUNCIL — JULY 13, 2004 Vendor shall be entitled to receive a registerable executed release of said Option to Purchase Agreement. e) Conditional on Reservation of Easement: The Vendor agrees to grant an easement in favour of the Purchaser over Part of Lot 87, Plan 246, designated as Part 1, 65R- 27176, Town of Aurora, Regional Municipality of York for storm sewer purposes on the Date of Completion. Conditional on Inspection of Site Condition Data: The Vendor shall deliver to the Purchaser within twenty (20) days of the Acceptance of this Agreement by Council pursuant to paragraph 3a) above, copies of any/all reports, evidence, and/or certificates in the possession or control of the Vendor relating to the condition or development of the Property including but not limited to the location of abandoned or buried structures such as barn foundations, cisterns, and wells. The Purchaser shall thereafter have ten (10) days from the receipt thereof to satisfy itself as to the provisions contained therein. In the event that the Purchaser, in its absolute and unqualified discretion, is not satisfied in every regard as to the contents of the data provided, the Purchaser will notify the Vendor, or the Vendor's solicitor, within thirty (30) days of the acceptance ofthis Agreement by Council pursuant to paragraph 3a) above to such effect and declare this Agreement to be null and void, and neither party shall be under any further liability to the other. If, however, such notice is not given to the Vendor, or the Vendor's solicitor within the time aforesaid, this condition shall become null and void and this Agreement shall be in full force and effect save and except as to the remainder of the conditions hereinbefore set out. This condition is included for the sole benefit of the Purchaser, and maybe waived at its option by notice in writing to the Vendor, or Vendor's solicitor, given at anytime prior to thirty (30) days following the acceptance of this Agreement by Council. g) Conditional on Soil Analysis: The Purchaser, its servants and agents have the right to enter upon the said Property after acceptance of this Agreement to make soil tests. If the soil tests are unsatisfactory to the Purchaser, in its sole opinion, the Purchaser will notify the Vendor, or the Vendor's solicitor, within thirty (30) days of the Acceptance of this Agreement by Council pursuant to paragraph 3a) above, to such effect and declare this agreement to be null and void and neither party shall be under any further liability to the other. If, however, such notice is not given to the Vendor, or the Vendor's solicitor within the time aforesaid, this condition shall become null and void and this agreement shall be in full force and effect save and except as to the remainder of the conditions hereinbefore set out. Thiscondition is included for the sole benefit of the Purchaser, and may be waived at its option by notice in writing to the Vendor, or Vendor's solicitor, given at any time prior to thirty (30) days following the acceptance of this Agreement by Council pursuant to paragraph 3a) above. h) Conditional Upon Satisfactory Environmental Assessment: The Purchaser, its servants and agents have the right to enter upon the said Property after acceptance of this Agreement by Council pursuant to paragraph 3a) above, to carry -out environmental assessments of the condition of the Property, which tests may include drilling boreholes and taking away soil, sediment, minerals or liquids for the purposes of testing. If the said assessment or tests are unsatisfactory to the Purchaser, in its sole opinion, the Purchaser will notify the Vendor, or the Vendor's solicitor, within thirty (30) days of the acceptance of this Agreement by Council pursuant to paragraph 3a) above, to such effect and declare this Agreement to be null and void and neither party shall be under any further liability to the other. If, however, such notice is not given to the Vendor, or the Vendor's solicitor within the time aforesaid, this condition shall become null and void and this Agreement shall be in full force and effect save and except as to the remainder of the conditions hereinbefore set out. This condition is included for the sole benefit of the Purchaser, and maybe waived at its option by notice in writing to the Vendor, or Vendor's solicitor, given at anytime prior to thirty (30) days following the acceptance of this Agreement by Council pursuant to paragraph 3a) above. —259— COUNCIL - JULY 13, 2004 4. Date of Completion: The data of completion of this Agreement shall be August 17, 2004. 5. Fixtures: Fixtures, if any, that may exist on the Property are included in the purchase price but no chattels are included and any chattels must be removed by the Vendor at its expense prior to the Date of Completion, G. Encumbrances: Except as otherwise provided herein, the Vendor, shall discharge at its own expense, all liens, charges and encumbrances affecting the Property on or before the Date of Completion. 7. Possession on Closing: Upon the Date of Completion, vacant possession of the Property shall be given to the Purchaser. 8. Binding Agreement: Purchaser acknowledges having inspected the Property prior to executing this Agreement and understands that upon acceptance of this Agreement by the Purchasers' Council, there shall be a binding agreement of purchase and sale between the Purchaser and the Vendor. 9. Licenseto Enter: On acceptance of this Agreement, the Purchaser, its planners, engineers, surveyors, or other agents shall be allowed to enter the said Property for the purpose of obtaining data and any for other purpose required hereunder. 10, Documents and Discharge: Purchaser shall not call for the production of any title deed, abstract, survey or other evidence of title to the Property except such as are in the possession or control of the Vendor. If requested by Purchaser, the Vendors will deliver any sketch or survey of the Property with the Vendor's control to Purchaser as soon as possible and prior to the Requisition Date. If a discharge of any Charge/Mortgage held by a corporation incorporated pursuant to the Loan Companies Act (Canada), Chartered Bank, Trust Company, Credit Union, Caisse Populaire or Insurance Company and which is not to be assumed by Purchaser on the Date of Completion, is not available in a form that can be registered on completion, Purchaser agrees to accept the Vendor's lawyer's personal undertaking to obtain, out of the closing funds, a discharge in a form that can be registered and to register same on title within areasonable period of time after the Data of Completion, provided that on or before the Date of Completion the Vendor shall provide to Purchaser a mortgage statement prepared by the mortgagee setting out the balance required to obtain the discharge, together with a direction executed by the Vendor directing payment to the mortgagee of the amount required to obtain the discharge out of the balance due on the Date of Completion. 11. Survey: The Vendor shall commission, at its own expense, a reference plan of survey sufficient to define the limits of the transfer as approved by the Purchaser, and cause it to be deposited in the appropriate Land Registry office in relation to the Property. 12. Title Matters: Provided the title to the Property shall be good and free of all registered restrictions, charges, liens and encumbrances, except as specifically provided for in this Agreement and except for (a) registered restrictions or covenants that mn with the land provided these are complied with, (b) registered municipal agreements and registered agreements with publicly regulated utilities providing such have been complied with or security has been posted to ensure compliance and completion as evidenced by a letter from the entity having jurisdiction, (c) minor easements for the supply of domestic utility or telephone services to the Property or adjacent properties, (d) any easements for drainage, storm or sanitary sewers, public utility lines, telephone lines, cable television lines or other services which do not materially affect the present use of the Property, the Purchaser agrees to accept title subject to same. The Vendor authorizes the Purchaser to make enquiries in relation to the Property and to use its records for purposes related to completion of this transaction. 13. Certificate of Title: The Vendor shall supply, at its own expense, twenty (20) days prior to the Date of Completion a draft certificate of title for approval as to form and content by the -260- COUNCIL - JULY 13, 2004 Purchaser's solicitor and further on the Date of Completion, a fully executed certificate of title from a solicitor duly qualified to practice law in the Province of Ontario certifying that the Purchaser's title to the Property is good and marketable and free and clear of all encumbrances, save and except for anypermitted encumbrances disclosed on such certificate. 14. Requisitions: Purchaser will be allowed until 11:59 p.m. on the day thirty (30) days from the date of acceptance hereof by Council pursuant to paragraph 3 a) above to investigate the title of the Property at Purchaser's expense, including the Vendor's capacity to convey title, and if within that time the Purchaser shall furnish the Vendor in writing with any valid objection made in writing as to title, which the Vendor shall be unable or unwilling to remove and which the Purchaser will not waive, this Agreement, notwithstanding any intermediate acts or negotiations in respect of such objections, shall be at an end. Save as to any valid objections so made by such date mid except for any valid objection going to the root of title, Purchaser shall be conclusively deemed to have accepted the Vendors'title to the Property. 15. Environmental: The Vendor shall provide to the Purchaser, a record of site condition within thirty (30) days of acceptance of this Agreement by Council pursuant to paragraph 3a) above, and the Vendor further warrants and represents to the Purchaser that to the best of its knowledge, no part of the Property has ever been used as a waste disposal site; no contaminants, pollutants, dangerous substances, liquid waste or hazardous materials exist or have been stored in or on the Property; that there are not now, nor have there ever been underground storage tanks located on the Property; and that this provision shall not merge upon, but shall survive the completion of this transaction. 16. UFFI Warranty: not applicable. 17, Potable Water: not applicable. 18. Septic System: not applicable. 19. Work Orders: The Vendor warrants that there are no building deficiencies or violations of any Federal or Provincial laws or regulations, or any non-compliance with any orders or approvals of any government authority relating to the Property or its use which might interfere with the Purchaser's intended use of the Property. The Vendorundertakes to advise the Purchaser immediately: a) uponbecoming aware of any error in this statement; or b) upon receipt of notice from any municipal or governmental authority regarding the foregoing; or c) upon becoming aware of any changes in the circumstances under which such statement is made. 20. Bulk Sales Act: In the event that the Property is all or substantially all of the assets of the Vendor, this Agreement is made in pursuance of The Bulk Sales Act. R.S.O. 1990, c.B.14, as amended, and the parties hereto agree to comply with the said Act in every respect. The Vendor shall, on the Date of Completion, deliver to the Purchaser, a property Bill of Sale, Declaration as to Seller's Creditors, and any and all other documentation as required by the said Act. 21. Family Law Act: not applicable. 22. Planning Act: The Agreement arising from the acceptance of this Agreement is subject to the express condition that if the provisions of Section 50 of The Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, as amended, apply to this transaction, the said Agreement shall be effective to create an interest in lands only if such provisions are complied with. 23. Insurance: All buildings on the Property and all other things being purchased shall be and remain until the Date of Completion at the risk of the Vendor. Following the closing date the policy will become the responsibility of the Purchaser. -261- COUNCIL - JULY 13, 2004 24. Transfer: The Transfer/Deed to be delivered by the Vendor to the Purchaser will be in the usual statutory form, that can be registered and prepared at the expense of the Vendor. 25. Adjustments: Any rents, mortgage interest, taxes, local improvement charges, water and unmetered utility charges and the cost of fuel, as applicable, shallbe apportioned and allowed to the Date of Completion, the day itself to be apportioned to the Purchaser. 26, Time: Time shall in all respects be of the essence hereof provided that the time for doing or completing of any matter provided for herein may be extended or abridged by an agreement in writing signed by the Vendor and Purchaser or by their respective solicitors who are hereby expressly appointed in this regard. 27. Tender: Any tender of documents or money hereunder may be made upon the Vendor or Purchaser or their respective solicitors on the Date of Completion of this Agreement. Money may be tendered by batik draft or cheque certified by a chartered bank, trust company, Province of Ontario Savings Office, Credit Union or Caisse Populair 28. Entire Agreement: This Agreement shall constitute the entire agreement between the Purchaser and the Vendor, There is no representation, warranty, collateral agreement or condition, whether director collateral, or express or implied, which induced anypartyherem to enter into this Agreement or on which reliance is placed by any such party, or which affects this Agreement or the Property other than as expressed herein. This Agreement shall be read with all changes of gender or number required bythe context. In the event of conflict between provisions written or typed into this Agreement and any provision in the printed portion hereof the written or typed provision shall supersede the printed provisions to the extent of such conflict. Headings inserted at the beginning of each paragraph in this Agreement are for ease of reference only and do not form part of this Agreement: 29. Assignment: The Purchaser may, at anytime prior to closing, assign this Agreement to any person or Corporation and upon delivery to the Vendor's solicitors of a notice of such Assignment, together with the Assignee's consent to be bound by all the provisions contained herein, and the Purchaser shall be relieved of any and all liability and this Agreement shall be read as though such Assignee were originally named as Purchaser. 30. Binding on Successors: This Agreement and everypart thereof shall enure to the benefit of and be binding upon the respective heirs, executors, administrators, successors and assigns of each of the Purchaser and the Vendor. 31, GST: The purchase price stated herein is exclusive of my Goods and Services Tax(G.S.T.) payable by the Purchaser pursuant to the Excise Tax Act. Where the Purchaser is required by law to remit the G.S.T. directly to the Department ofNational Revenue, the Purchaser agrees to provide the Vendor with evidence of the Purchaser's registration issued pursuant to the said Act, and evidence of such payment. If the Purchaser provides evidence of registration, the Purchaser undertakes to the Vendor to remit directly to Revenue Canada, Customs and Excise, any CST that may be exigible in respect of the Purchase and Sale of the Property hereunder. 32. Income Tax: The Purchaser shall be credited towards the purchase price with the amount,if any, which it shall be necessary for the Purchaser to pay to the Receiver General of Canada in order to satisfy Purchaser's liability in respect of tax payable by the Vendor under the non- residencyprovisionsof the Income Tax Act by reason of this sale. Purchaser shall not claim such credit if the Vendor delivers on completion the prescribed certificate or its statutory declaration that it is not a non-resident of Canada. -262- COUNCIL - JULY 13, 2004 M 33, Notice: All notices or correspondence to be given hereunder may be effectively so given by delivering same by prepaid post to the Purchaser at: 100 John West Way, P.O. Box 1000, Aurora, Ontario, L4G 6J1, Fax No. (905) 841-3483, Attention: Leisure Services Department and to the Vendor at: 205 Industrial Parkway North, Aurora, Ontario, L4G 4C4, Fax No. (905) 841-2177, Attention: Mario Giorgio, CEO. Dated at Aurora this ;Zs i° t day of �j tN*ve , 2004. IN WITNESS WHEREOF the undersigned has hereunto set its hand and seal through its officers duly authorized in that regard: THE CORPORATION OF THE TOWN OF AURORA Lawrence Allison, Chief Administrative Officer The Vendoor� hereby accepts this Agreement Dated at/r{'1- /t')'-ui this,`-';' d%yof-t-�--� - 2004. TERRA. AURORA INC._ " Nam6 fario Giorgio Title: Chief Executive Officer ta4,„iapj Name: Frank Giorgio ' - ' - ' • • - ' " Title: President - (I/We have the authority to bind the Corporation) The Council of The Corporation of the Town of Aurora hereby accepts this Agreement Dated at this day of , 2004. THE CORPORATION OF THE TOWN OF AURORA Tim Jones, Mayor Bob Panizza, Town Clerk -263- COUNCIL - JULY 13, 2004 SCHEDULE"A" Leal Description of Property All and singular those certain parcels or tracts of land and premises situate, lying and being in the Town of Aurora, in the RegionalMunicipalityof York and being composed of the following; Part of Lot 87, Plan 246 Designated as Part 3, 65R-27176 -264- COUNCIL - JULY 13, 2004 OFFER TO PURCHASE ATTACHMENT D Terra Aurora Inc. (the "Purchaser") offers to purchase from The Corporation of the Town of Aurora (the "Vendor") certain lands in the Town of Aurora, Regional Municipality of York, having an area of approximately 883 in', being Part of Lot 87, Plan 246, further described on Schedule "A" attached hereto (the "Property"), at the purchase price of Two Dollars (Can. $ 2.00) on the following terms: Purchase Price: The Purchaser shall pay Two Dollars (Can. $2.00) on closing, the receipt and sufficiency whereof is hereby acknowledged. 2. Irrevocable: Purchaser agrees that this Agreement shall be irrevocable by the Purchaser until 11:59 a.m. on the 14`h day of July, 2004, after which time, if not accepted, this Agreement shall be null and void. 3. Conditions: This Agreement and anyresulting contract ofpurchase and sale is subject to the following specific conditions and failing the fulfillment of any one or more of them at or before closing, the Purchaser shall at his sole option have the right to declare this contract, even though accepted, null and void and shall be entitled to the return of all monies paid herein, together with accrued interest: a) Conditional on Applicable Procedures: The Vendor shall complete all processes required by applicable legislation, including legislation of the Vendor, in order to convey the Property. Such processes shall include holding a public meeting by the Council of the Vendor to consider acceptance of this Agreement. lfwithin thirty (30) days of the execution of this Agreement by both parties, such processes are not completed or the Agreement is not accepted by Council, this Agreement shall be at an end, and neither party shall be under any further liability to the other. This condition is included for the sole benefit of the Vendor, and may be waived at its option by notice in writing to the Purchaser, or Purchaser's solicitor, given at any time prior to thirty (30) days following the acceptance of this Agreement, The Purchaser acknowledges that negotiation of this Agreement by the Vendor's staff shall not prejudice the Vendor's right to approve this Agreement. b) Conditional on Purchaser's Payment of Vendor's Fees: The Purchaser agrees to pay the Vendor, the Vendor's administration fee in the amount ofNine Hundred and Seventy -Five Dollars (Cdn. $975.00) upon execution of this Agreement. c) Conditional on Related Offe'rto Purchase Agreement: The Vendor agrees that this Agreement is conditional upon the Purchaser's approval and subsequent completion of the related Offer to Purchase Agreement between The Corporation of the Town of Aurora as Purchaser and Tens Aurora Inc, as Vendor for the lands described as Part of Lot 87, Plan 246, designated as Part 3, Plan 65R-27176, Town of Aurora, Regional Municipality of York. d) Conditional on Option to Purchase Agreement: The Purchaser and the Vendor agree to enter into Option to Purchase Agreements on or before the date of closing which provide that if the Director of Building Administration for the Town of Aurora, within two (2) years from the date of closing, does not approve the issuance of a building permit in favour of the Purchaser over the Purchaser's adjoining lands described as Part of Lot 87, Plan 246, designated as Part 1 on 65R-4573 to permit the construction of a 72,000 square foot expansion of the north building comprising of warehousing, and cafeteria uses, substantially in the farm of a sketch attached hereto as Schedule "B", then the lands conveyed pursuant to Section 3 a) above may be re - conveyed to the Vendor, at the Vendor's expense. Provided that the Purchaser has been issued an Occupancy Permit by the Town of Aurora in relation to the above - noted building permit within four (4) years from the Date of Completion, or within such time(s) as may be extended in writing by the Vendor within its sole discretion, -265- COUNCIL - JULY 13, 2004 the Purchaser shall be entitled to receive a registerable executed release of said Option to Purchase Agreement. e) Conditional on Reservation of Easement: The Purchaser agrees to grant an easement in favour of the Vendor over Part of Lot 87, Plan 246, designated as Part 1, 65R-27176, Town of Aurora, Regional Municipality of York for storm sewer purposes on the Date of Completion. t) Conditional on Inspection of Site Condition Data: The Vendor shall deliver to the Purchaser within twenty (20) days of the Acceptance of this Agreement by Council pursuant to paragraph 3a) above, copies of any/all reports, evidence, and/or certificates in the possession or control of the Vendor relating to the condition or development of the Property including but not limited to the location of abandoned or buried structures such as barn foundations, cisterns, and wells. The Purchaser shall thereafter have ten (10) days from the receipt thereof to satisfy itself as to the provisions contained therein. In the event that the Purchaser, in its absolute and unqualified discretion, is not satisfied in every regard as to the contents of the data provided, the Purchaser will notify the Vendor, or the Vendor's solicitor, within thirty (30) days of the acceptance of this Agreement by Council pursuant to paragraph 3a) above to such effect and declare this Agreement to be null and void, and neither party shall be under any further liability to the other. If, however, such notice is not given to the Vendor, or the Vendor's solicitor within the time aforesaid, this condition shall become null and void and this Agreement shall be in full force and effect save and except as to the remainder of the conditions hereinbefore set out. This condition is included for the sole benefit of the Purchaser, and may be waived at its option by notice in writing to the Vendor, or Vendor's solicitor, given at any time prior to thirty (30) days following the acceptance of this Agreement by Council. g) Conditional on Soil Analysis: The Purchaser, its servants and agents have the right to enter upon the said Property after acceptance of this Agreement to make soil tests. If the soil tests are unsatisfactory to the Purchaser, in its sole opinion, the Purchaser will notify the Vendor, or the Vendor's solicitor, within thirty (30) days of the Acceptance of this Agreement by Council pursuant to paragraph 3a) above, to such effect and declare this agreement to be null and void and neitherparty shall bounder any further liability to the other. If, however, such notice is not given to the Vendor, or the Vendor's solicitor within the time aforesaid, this condition shall become null and void and this agreement shall be in full force and effect save and except as to the remainder of the conditions hereinbefore set out. This condition is included for the sole benefit of the Purchaser, and may be waived at its option by notice in writing to the Vendor, or Vendor's solicitor, given at any time prior to thirty (30) days fallowing the acceptance of this Agreement by Council pursuant to paragraph 3a) above. h) Conditional Upon. Satisfactory Environmental Assessment: The Purchaser, its servants and agents have the right to enter upon the said Property after acceptance of this Agreement by Council pursuant to paragraph 3a) above, to carry -out environmental assessments of the condition of the Property, which tests may include drilling boreholes and taking away soil, sediment, minerals or liquids for the purposes of testing. If the said assessment or tests are unsatisfactory to the Purchaser, in its sole opinion, the Purchaser will notify the Vendor, or the Vendor's solicitor, within thirty (30) days of the acceptance of this Agreement by Council pursuant to paragraph 3a) above, to such effect and declare this Agreement to be null and void and neither party shall be under any further liability to the other. If, however, such notice is not given to the Vendor, or the Vendor's solicitor within the time aforesaid, this condition shall become null and void and this Agreement shall be in full force and effect save and except as to the remainder of the conditions hereinbefore set out. This condition is included for the sole benefit of the Purchaser, and maybe waived at its option by notice in writing to the Vendor, or Vendor's solicitor, given at anytime prior to thirty (30) days following the acceptance of this Agreement by Council Pursuant to paragraph 3a) above. -266- COUNCIL - JULY 13, 2004 4. Date of Completion: The date of completion of this Agreement shall be August 17, 2004. 5. Fixtures: Fixtures, if any, that may exist on the Property are included in the purchase price but no chattels are included and any chattels must be removed by the Vendor at its expense prior to the Date of Completion. 6. Encumbrances: Except as otherwise provided herein, the Vendor, shall discharge at its own expense, all liens, charges and encumbrances affecting the Property on or before the Date of Completion. 7. Possession on Closing: Upon the Data of Completion, vacant possession of the Property shall be given to the Purchaser. 8. Binding Agreement: Purchaser acknowledges having inspected the Property prior to executing this Agreement and understands that upon acceptance of this Agreement by the Purchasers' Council, there shall be a binding agreement of purchase and sale between the Purchaser and the Vendor. 9. License to Enter: On acceptance of this Agreement, the Purchaser, its planners, engineers, surveyors, or other agents shall be allowed to enter the said Property for the purpose of obtaining data and any for other purpose required hereunder. 10. Documents and Discharge: Purchaser shall not call for the production of any title deed, abstract, survey or other evidence of title to the Property except such as are in the possession or control of the Vendor. If requested by Purchaser, the Vendors will deliver any sketch or survey of the Propertywith the Vendor's control to Purchaser as soon as possible and prior to the Requisition Date. If a discharge of any Charge/Mortgage held by a corporation incorporated pursuant to the Loan Companies Act (Canada), Chartered Bank, Trust Company, Credit Union, Caisse Populaire or Insurance Company and which is not to be assumed by Purchaser on the Date of Completion, is not available in a form that can be registered on completion, Purebaser agrees to accept the Vendor's lawyer's personal undertaking to obtain, out of the closing funds, a discharge in a form that can be registered and to register same on title within a reasonable period of time after the Date of Completion, provided that on or before the Date of Completion the Vendor shall provide to Purchaser a mortgage statement prepared by the mortgagee setting out the balance required to obtain the discharge, together with a direction executed by the Vendor directing payment to the mortgagee of the amount required to obtain the discharge out of the balance due on the Date of Completion.. 11. Survey: The Purchaser shall commission, at its own expense, a reference plan of survey sufficient to define the limits of the transfer as approved by the Vendor, and cause it to be deposited in the appropriate Land Registry office in relation to the Property. 12. Title Matters: Provided the title to the Property shall be good and free of all registered restrictions, charges, liens and encumbrances, except as specifically provided for in this Agreement and except for (a) registered restrictions or covenants that ran with the land provided these are complied with, (b) registered municipal agreements a:rd registered agreements with publicly regulated utilities providing such have been complied with or security has been posted to ensure compliance and completion as evidenced by a letter from the entity having jurisdiction, (c) minor easements for the supply of domestic utility or telephone services to the Property or adjacent properties, (d) any easements for drainage, stoma or sanitary sewers, public utility lines, telephone lines, cable television lines or other services which do not materially affect the present use of the Property, the Purchaser agrees to accept title subject to same. The Vendor authorizes the Purchaser to make enquiries in relation to the Property and to use its records for purposes related to completion of this transaction. -267- COUNCIL - JULY 13, 2004 14, Requisitions: Purchaser will be allowed until 11:59 p.m. on the day thirty (30) days from the date of acceptance hereof by Council pursuant to paragraph 3 a) above to investigate the title of the Property at Purchaser's expense, including the Vendor's capacity to convey title, and if within that time the Purchaser shall furnish the Vendor in writing with any valid objection made in writing as to title, which the Vendor shall be unable or unwilling to remove and which the Purchaser will not waive, this Agreement, notwithstanding any intermediate acts or negotiations in respect of such objections, shall be at an end. Save as to any valid objections so made by such date and except for any valid objection going to the root of title, Purchaser shall be conclusively deemed to have accepted the Vendors'title to the Property. 15. Environmental: The Vendor shall provide to the Purchaser, a record of site condition within thirty (30) days of acceptance of this Agreement by Council pursuant to paragraph 3a) above, and the Vendor further warrants and represents to the Purchaser that to the but of its knowledge, no part of the Property has ever been used as a waste disposal site; no contaminants, pollutants, dangerous substances, liquid waste or hazardous materials exist or have been stored in or on the Property; that there are not now, nor have there ever been underground storage tanks located on the Property; and that this provision shall not merge upon, but shall survive the completion of this transaction. 16. UFF1 Warranty: not applicable. 17. Potable Water: not applicable. 18. Septic System: not applicable. lR Work Orders: The Vendor warrants that there are no building deficiencies or violations of any Federal or Provincial laws or regulations, or any non-compliance with any orders or approvals of any government authority relating to the Property or its use which might interfere with the Purchaser's intended use of the Property. The Vendor undertakes to advise the Purchaser immediately: a) upon becoming aware of any error in this statement; or b) upon receipt of notice from any municipal or governmental authority regarding the foregoing; or c) upon becoming aware of any changes in the circumstances wider which such statement is made. - 20. Bulk Sales Act: 1n the event that the Property is all or substantially all of the assets of the Vendor, this Agreement is made in pursuance of The Bulk Sales Act. R.S.O. 1990, c.B.14, as amended, .and the parties hereto agree to comply with the said Act in every respect. The Vendor shall, on the Date of Completion, deliver to the Purchaser, a property Bill of Sale, Declaration as to Seller's Creditors, and any and all other documentation as required by the said Act. 21, Family Law Act: not applicable. 22. Planning Act: The Agreement arising from the acceptance of this Agreement is subject to the express condition that if the provisions of Section 50 of The Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, as amended, apply to this transaction, the said Agreement shall be effective to create an interest in lands only if such provisions are complied with. 23. Insurance: All buildings on the Property and all other things being purchased shall be and remain until the Date of Completion at the risk ofthe Vendor. Following the closing date the policy will become the responsibility of the Purchaser. 24. Transfer: The Transfer/Deed to be delivered by the Vendor to the Purchaser will be in the usual statutory form, that can be registered and prepared at the expense of the Vendor. COUNCIL - JULY 13, 2004 25. Adjustments: Any rents, mortgage interest, taxes, local improvement charges, water and unmetered utility charges and the cost of fuel, as applicable, shall be apportioned and allowed to the Date of Completion, the day itself to be apportioned to the Purchaser. 26. Time: Time shall in all respects be of the essence hereof provided that the time for doing or completing of any matter provided for herein may be extended or abridged by an agreement in writing signed by the Vendor and Purchaser or by their respective solicitors who are hereby expressly appointed in this regard, 27. Tender: Any tender of documents or money hereunder may be made upon the Vendor or Purchaser or their respective solicitors on the Date of Completion of this Agreement. Money may be tendered by bank draft or cheque certified by a chartered bank, trust company, Province of Ontario Savings Office, Credit Union or Caisse Populair 28. Entire Agreement: This Agreement shall constitute the entire agreement between the Purchaser and the Vendor. There is no representation, warranty, collateral agreement or condition, whether direct or collateral, or express or implied, which induced anypartyhereto to enter into this Agreement or on which reliance is placed by any such party, or which affects this Agreement or the Property other than as expressed herein. This Agreement shall be read with all changes of gender or number required by the context. fn the event of conflict between provisions written or typed into this Agreement and any provision in the printed portion hereof the written or typed provision shall supersede the printed provisions to fire extent of such conflict. Headings inserted at the beginning of each paragraph in this Agreement are for ease of reference only and do not farm part of this Agreement. 29. Assignment: The Purchaser may, at anytime prior to closing, assign this Agreement to any person or Corporation and upon delivery to the Vendor's solicitors of a notice of such Assignment, togetherwith the Assignee's consent to be bound by all the provisions contained herein, and the Purchaser shall be relieved of any and all liability and this Agreement shall be read as though such Assignee were originally named as Purchaser. 30. Binding on Successors: This Agreement and every part thereof shall enure to the benefit of and be binding upon the respective heirs, executors, administrators, successors and assigns of each of the Purchaser and the Vendor. 31. GST: The purchase price stated herein is exclusive of any Goods and Services Tax (G.S.T.) payable by the Purchaserpursuant to the Excise Tax Act. Where the Purchaser is required by law to remit the G.S.T. directlyto the Department of National Revenue, the Purchaser agrees to provide the Vendor with evidence of the Purchaser's registration issued pursuant to the said Act, and evidence of such paymenk If the Purchaserprovides evidence of registration, the Purchaser undertakes to the Vendor to remit directly to Revenue Canada, Customs and Excise, any GST that may be exigible in respect of the Purchase and Sale of the Property hereunder. 32. Income Tax: The Purchaser shall be credited towards the purchase price with the amount, if any, which it shall be necessary for the Purchaser to pay to the Receiver General of Canada in order to satisfy Purchaser's liability in respect of tax payable by the Vendor under the non- residency provisions ofthe Income Tax Act byreason o£this sale. Purchaser shall not claim such credit if the Vendor delivers on completion the prescribed certificate or its statutory declaration that it is not a non-resident of Canada. -269- COUNCIL - JULY 13, 2004 3 33. Notice: All notices or correspondence to be given hereunder maybe effectively so given by delivering same by prepaid post to the Purchaser at: 100 John West Way, P.O. Box 1000, Aurora, Ontario, L40 6J1, Fax No. (905) 841-3483, Attention: Leisure ServicesDepartment and to the Vendor at: 205 Industrial Parkway North, Aurora, Ontario, L4G 4C4, Fax No. (905) 841-2177, Attention: Mario Giorgio, CEO. Dated at Aurora this L �s�J day of J Lti , 2004. IN WITNESS WHEREOF the undersigned has hereunto set its hand and seal through its officers duly authorized in that regard: THE CORPORATION OF THE TOWN OF AURORA Lawrence Allison, Chief Administrative Officer The Vendor hereby accepts this Agreement Dated at this 25� day of --I C- 2004. TERRA AURORA INC. Nam anoGiorgio � �— Title: Chief Executive Officer .14 Name: Frank Giorgio Title: President . ' ' . (I(e have the authority to bind the Corporation) The Council of The Corporation of the Town of Aurora hereby accepts this Agreement Dated at this day of , 2004. THE CORPORATION OF THE TOWN OF AURORA Tim Jones, Mayor Bob Panizza, Town a -270- COUNCIL - JULY 13, 2004 SCHEDULE"A" Legal Description of Property All and singular those certain parcels or tracts of land and premises situate, lying and being in the Town of Aurora, in the Regional Municipality of York and being composed of the following: Part of Lot 87, Plan 246 Designated as Parts 1 and 2, 65R-27176 -271- COUNCIL - JULY 13, 2004 ATTACHMENT E OPTION TO PURCHASE THIS AGREEMENT made this 13" day of July, 2004, BETWEEN: THE CORPORATION OF THE TOWN OF AURORA (Hereinafter called the "OPTIONOR" of the FIRST PART) and - TERRA AURORA INC. (Hereinafter called the "OPTIONEE" of the SECOND PART) WITNESSETH that in consideration of the sum of Two Dollars ($2.00) now paid by the Optionee to the Optionor, the receipt whereof is hereby acknowledged, the Optionor hereby gives to the Optionec on the following terms, an irrevocable Option within the time limited herein for acceptance to purchase, free from encumbrances, all the lands and premises described on Schedule "A" attached hereto (hereinafter the "Lands"), save and except those encumbrances registered after the day the Optionor became the registered owner of the Lands: I. The Option shall be open for acceptance in the manner prescribed herein, subject to the provisions for extension set out herein, and may be accepted by a letter delivered to the Optionor at 100 John West Way, P.O. Box 1000, Aurora, Ontario, L4G 6J1. 2. The Purchase price of the said Lands shall be the sum of Two Dollars ($2.00) payable as follows.. With acceptance of said Option, the Optionee shall pay to the Optionor the sum of Two Dollars ($2.00) cash or uncertified cheque to the said Optionor and the purchase of the said Lands shall be completed seven (7) days after said notice is delivered to the Optionor as set out herein. In exchange for an executed Transfer/Deed from the Optionor, the Optionee shall deliver on or before the closing a registerable release of this Agreement. 3. The Optionee agrees to pay the Optionor upon execution of this Agreement, the Optionor's administration fee in the amount of Nine Hundred and Seventy -Five Dollars (Cdn. $975.00) for the preparation of this Agreement. 4. It is the intention of the Opdonee herein to complete a series of works upon the Optionee's adjoining lands described as Part of Lot 87, Plan 246, designated as Part 1 on 65R-4573 (hereinafter the "Adjoining Lands") which includes the construction of a 72,000 square foot expansion of the north building comprising of warehousing, and cafeteria uses, substantially in the form of a sketch attached hereto as Schedule `13", (hereinafter the "Works") . 5. The Optionor hereby covenants and agrees with the Optionee that prior to commencement of the above Works, the Optionee shall obtain site plan approval as well as any other approvals, permits, and consents from the applicable agencies as may be required. 6. The registration of any "Claim for Lien" under the provisions of the Construction Lien Act or successor legislation thereto against any of the Lands, or any of the lands of the Optionee, shall be deemed to constitute a breach or default by the Optionor of its obligations under this Agreement unless the Optionor has discharged the lien or caused the lien to be withdrawn within fifteen (B) days of written notice from the Optionee to the Optionor to so discharge the lien or make other arrangements satisfactory to the Optionee in this regard. Upon the failure of the Optionor to obtain and register a release of the Claim for Lien and an Order vacating any registered Certificate of Action with the timeframe above, the Optionee may use a portion or the whole of the Securities for the purpose of paying sufficient security into Court to entitle the Optionee to an Order releasing the Claim for Lien and vacating any Certificate of Action. The Optionee may further use a portion or the whole of the Securities for the purpose of paying the legal costs of any motion brought for the purpose of discharging the lien, including the -272- COUNCIL - JULY 13, 2004 Page 2 Optionee's fees as established from time to time under its Fees and Services By-law for the costs associated with administering the claim, together with the disbursements associated with the registration of any release, discharge or vacating Order. The Optionor hereby expressly appoints the Optionee's Solicitor as its agent for the purpose of bringing a motion in this regard and registering any release, discharge or vacating Order on title to the Lands, or a portion thereof. 7. The Optionee, by its employees and agents, during the currency of this Agreement, may enter on any part of the Lands and any building(s) erected therein to ensure proper compliance with any of the terms of this Agreement. S. In the event that, - a) a Building Permit for the said Works is not issued by the Director of Building Administration for the Town of Aurora within two (2) years after the day the Optionor became the registered owner of the Lands, the Optionee may exercise this Option, at its sole discretion, at any time but not prior to two (2) years and six (6) months after the day the Optionor became the registered owner of the Lands; or b) a Final Occupancy Permit for the said Works is not issued by the Director of Building Administration for the Town of Aurora within four (4) years after the day the Optionor became the registered owner of the Lands, the Optionee may exercise this Option, at its sole discretion, at any time but not prior to four (4) years and six (6) months after the day the Optionor became the registered owner ' of the Lands. 9. Provided the title to the Lands is good and free from all encumbrances, except local rates and except as provided below; said title to be examined by the Optionee at its own expense, and the Optionee is not to call for the production of any title deeds or abstracts of title, proof or evidence of title, or to have famished any copies thereof, other than those in the Optionor's possession or under his control. The Optionee accepts the Lands subject to tre restrictions and covenants that run with the Lands, providing the same have been complied with, and subject to any agreement with the Town of Aurora respecting the future development of the Lands. The Optionee shall search the title at its own expense and shall have until closing, from the date of acceptance of the Option to examine it and shall then be deemed to have accepted the title, except as to any written objections made on or before closing. If any objection be made within that time, the Optionor shall have until closing to remove it. 10. Provided that should the Optionee exercise this Option, the said Lands mustbe conveyed to the Optionee in the state and condition they were in on the day the Optionor became the registered owner of the Lands, and, the Lands shall be returned to this state at the sole expense of the Optionor prior to completion. In. the event that the Optionee completes the restoration of the condition of the Lands as provided for above, the cost of any work done by the Optionee shall include a management fee of ten per cent (10%) of the cost of all labour, materials, and equipment incurred to complete the work, and further a fee of thirty (30%) for the charges so determined as compensation to the Optionee for the work and for the dislocation and inconvenience caused to the Optionee as a result of the default on the part of the Optionor to fulfil the obligation. In the event that the Securities are not sufficient to pay such amount, then the Optionor shall pay to the Optionee, on demand, any such additional cost. 11. This Option when accepted shall constitute a binding Contract of purchase and sale and time in all respects shall be the essence of this Agreement. 12. It is agreed that there is no representation, warranty, collateral agreement or condition affecting this Agreement affecting real property or supported hereby other than as expressed herein in writing. Upon completion, vacant possesion of tie Lands shall be given to the Optionee. 13. Any tender of documents or money hereunder may be made upon the solicitor acting for the party on whom tender is desired and it shall be sufficient that a negotiable uncertified cheque may be tendered instead of cash. -273- COUNCIL - JULY 13, 2004 Page 3 14. This Agreement shall enure to the benefit of and be binding upon the heirs, executors, administrators and assigns of the parties hereto respectively. 15. The closing of this transaction or the giving of notice of acceptance within this agreement shall not merge this Option Agreement and any resulting contract of purchase and sale and any and all conditions contained herein or therein, all of which shall survive the closing of the transaction and the giving of notice of acceptance of this Option. 16. The Optionor covenants and agrees: a) that this Agreement may be registered on title to the Lands in the appropriate Land Registry Office; b) that the cost of registration of this Agreement as well as any other costs incurred as a result of the registration of any other documents pertaining to this Agreement shall be paid by the Optionee; c) to give to every purchaser of the Lands actual notice of the existence and the terms of this Agreement and to include an acknowledgement of such notice in any Offer to Purchase or other similar document dealing with the Lands; d) to advise every mortgagor of the existence of this Option Agreement; and e) to not encumber the title to Lands in any manner. 17, It is expressly understood and agreement that the remedies of the Optionee under this Agreement are cumulative and the exercise by the Optionee of any right or remedy for the default or breach of any term, covenant, or condition herein contained shall not be deemed to be a waiver of or alter, affect, or prejudice any other remedy or other rights or remedies to which the Optionee may be lawfully entitled for the same default or breach and any waiver of any subsequent default or breach by the Optionor nor entitle the Optionor to any similar indulgence heretofore granted. IN WITNESS WHEREOF the undersigned have hereunto set their hands and seals through its officers duly authorized in that regard: THE CORPORATION OF THE TOWN OFAURORA Tim Jones, Mayor Bob Panizza, Town Clerk TERRRA,AUR INS �j Nam . ario Giorgio?'/. •::•:•:•:} , Title: Chief Executive Officer Name: Frank Giorgio Title: President (I/We have the authority to bind the Corporation) -274- COUNCIL - JULY 13, 2004 Schedule fOA" Legal Description of Lands Page 4 All and singular that certain parcel or tract of land and premises situate, lying and being in the Town of Aurora, in the Regional Municipality of York, and being composed of. - Part of Lot 87, Plan 246 Designated as Part 3, 66R-27176 -275- COUNCIL - JULY 13, 2004 Schedule "B" Sketch of Works Page 5 -- AHM P T M]PIII -276 COUNCIL - JULY 13, 2004 ATTACHMENT F OPTION TO PURCHASE THIS AGREEMENT made this 13ih day of July, 2004. BETWEEN: TERRA AURORA INC. (Hereinafter called the "OPTIONOR" of the FIRST PART) -and- THE CORPORATION OF THE TOWN OF AURORA (Hereinafter called the "OPTIONEE" of the SECOND PART) WITNESSETH that in, consideration of the sum of Two Dollars ($2.00) now paid by the Optionee to the Optionor, the receipt whereof is hereby acknowledged, the Optionor hereby gives to the Optionee on the following terms, an irrevocable Option within the time limited herein for acceptance to purchase, free from encumbrances, all the lands and premises described on Schedule "A" attached hereto (hereinafter the "Lands"), save and except those encumbrances registered after the day the Optionor became the registered owner of the Lands: The Option shall be open for acceptance in the manner prescribed herein, subject to the provisions for extension set out herein, and may be accepted,by a letter delivered to the Optionor at 205 Industrial Parkway North, Aurora, Ontario, L4G 4C4, Fax No. (905) 841-2177, Attention: Mario Giorgio, CEO. 2. The Purchase price of the said Lands shall be the sum of Two Dollars ($2.00) payable as follows: With acceptance of said Option, the Optionee shall pay to the Optionor the sum of Two Dollars ($2.00) cash or uncertified cheque to the said Optionor and the purchase of the said Lands shall be completed seven (7) days after said notice is delivered to the Optionor as set out herein. In exchange for an executed Transfer/Deed from the Optionor, the Optionee shall deliver on or before the closing a registerable release of this Agreement. 3. The Optionor agrees to pay the Optionee upon execution of this Agreement, the Optionee's administration fee in the amount of Nine Hundred and Seventy -Five Dollars (Cdn. $975.00) for the preparation of this Agreement. 4. It is the intention of the Optionor herein to complete a series of works upon the Optionor's adjoining lands described as Part of Lot 87, Plan 246, designated as Part 1 on 65R-4573 (hereinafter the "Adjoining Lands") which includes the construction of a 72,000 square foot expansion of the north building comprising of warehousing, and cafeteria uses, substantially in the form of a sketch attached hereto as Schedule "B", (hereinafter the "Works") . 5. The Optionor hereby covenants and agrees with the Optionee that prior to commencement of the above Works, the Optionor shall obtain site plan approval as well as any other approvals, permits, and consents ]`tom the applicable agencies as may be required. 6. The registration of any "Claim for Lien" under the provisions of the Construction Lien Act or successor legislation thereto against any of the Lands, or any of the lands of the Optionee, shall be deemed to constitute a breach or default by the Optionor of its obligations under this Agreement unless the Optionor has discharged the lien or caused the lien to be withdrawn within fifteen (15) days of written notice from the Optionee to the Optionor to so discharge the lien or make other arrangements satisfactory to the -277- COUNCIL - JULY 13, 2004 Page 2 Optionee in this regard. Upon the failure of the Optionor to obtain and register a release of the Claim for Lien and an Order vacating any registered Certificate of Action with the timeframe above, the Optionee may use a portion or the whole of the Securities for the purpose of paying sufficient security into Court to entitle the Optionee to an Order releasing the Claim for Lien and vacating any Certificate of Action. The Optionee may further use a portion or the whole of the Securities for the purpose of paying the legal costs of any motion brought for the purpose of discharging the lien, including the Optionee's fees as established from time to time under its Fees and Services By-law for the costs associated with administering the claim, together with the disbursements associated with the registration of any release, discharge or vacating Order. The Optionor hereby expressly appoints the Optionee's Solicitor as its agent for the purpose of bringing a motion in this regard and registering any release, discharge or vacating Order on title to the Lands, or a portion thereof. - 7. The Optionee, by its employees and agents, during the currency of this Agreement, may enter on any part of the Lands and any building(s) erected therein to ensure proper compliance with any of the terms of this Agreement. In the event that, a Building Permit for the said Works is not issued by the Director of Building Administration for the Town of Aurora within two (2) years after the day the Optionor became the registered owner of the Lands, the Optionee may exercise this Option, at its sole discretion, at any time but not prior to two (2) yens and six '. (6) months after the day the Optionor became the registered owner of the Lands; or b) a Final Occupancy Permit for the said Works is not issued by the Director of Building Administration for the Town of Aurora within four (4) years after the day the Optionor became the registered owner of the Lands, the Optionee may exercise this Option, at its sole discretion, at any time but not prior to four (4) years and six (6) months after the day the Optionor became the registered owner of the Lands. 9. The parties acknowledge that the Optionee is a land use planning authority and that no Optionee's representations are contained in this Option Agreement in relation to the future use of the said Lands. Should the Optionor apply for future development approvals in relation to the said Lands, the Optionor acknowledges that the Optionee is obliged to consider each planning application on its merits to hear and consider any objections, comments or concerns and to make an appropriate determination on the planning related merits of each application without regard to this Agreement. The Optionor further acknowledges and agrees that the Optionee is under no obligation by virtue of this Agreement to grant any approvals whatsoever, including without limiting the generality of the foregoing, approvals for applications in relation to amendments to the Official Plan, the Zoning By-law, consents or plans of subdivision or building permit or site plan applications, for any existing or contemplated use of die said Lands. 10. Provided the title to the Lands is good and free from all encumbrances, except local rates and except as provided below; said title to be examined by the Optionee at its own expense, and the Optionee is not to call for the production of any title deeds or abstracts of title, proof or evidence of title, or to have fumished any copies thereof, other than those in the Optionor's possession or under his control. The Optionee accepts the Lands subject to the restrictions and covenants that run with the Lands, providing the same have been complied with, and subject to any agreement with the Town of Aurora respecting the future development of the Lands. The Optionee shall search the title at its own expense and shall have until closing, from the date of acceptance of the Option to examine it and shall then be deemed to have accepted the title, except as to any written objections made on or before closing. If any objection be made within that time, the Optionor shall have until closing to remove it. It. Provided that should the Optionee exercise this Option, the said Lands must be conveyed to the Optionee in the state and condition they were in on the day the Optionor became -278- COUNCIL - JULY 13, 2004 Page 3 the registered owner of the Lands, and the Lands shall be returned to this state at the sole expense of the Optionor prior to completion. In the event that the Optionee completes the restoration of the condition of the Lands as provided for above, the cost of any work done by the Optionee shall include a management fee of ten per cent (10%) of the cost of all labour, materials, and equipment incurred to complete the work, and further a fee of thirty (30%) for the charges so determined as compensation to the Optionee for the work and for the dislocation and inconvenience caused to the Optionee as a result of the default on the part of the Optionor to fulfil the obligation. In the event that the Securities are not sufficient to pay such amount, then the Optionor shall pay to the Optionee, on demand, any such additional cost. 12, This Option when accepted shall constitute a binding Contract of purchase and sale and time in all respects shall be the essence of this Agreement. 13. It is agreed that there is no representation, warranty, collateral agreement or condition affecting this Agreement affecting real property or supported hereby other than as expressed herein in writing. Upon completion, vacant possesion of the Lands shall be given to the Optionee. 14, Any tender of documents or money hereunder may be made upon the solicitor acting for the party an whom tender is desired and it shall be sufficient that a negotiable uncertified cheque may be tendered instead of cash. 15. This Agreement shall enure to the benefit of and be binding upon the heirs, executors, administrators and assigns of the parties hereto respectively. 16. The closing of this transaction or the giving of notice of acceptance within this agreement shall not merge this Option Agreement and any resulting contract of purchase and sale and any and all conditions contained herein or therein, all of which shall survive the closing of the transaction and the giving of notice of acceptance of this Option. 17. The Optionor covenants and agrees: a) that this Agreement may be registered on title to the Lands in the appropriate Land Registry Office; b) that the cost of registration of this Agreement as well as any other costs incurred as a result of the registration of any other documents pertaining to this Agreement shall be paid by the Optionor, c) to give to every purchaser of the Lands actual notice of the existence and the terms of this Agreement and to include an acknowledgement of such notice in any Offer to Purchase or other similar document dealing with the Lands; d). to advise every mortgagor of the existence of this Option Agreement; and e) to not encumber the title to Lands in any manner. 18. It is expressly understood andagreement that the remedies of the Optionee under this Agreement are cumulative and the exercise by the Optionee of any right or remedy for the default or breach of any term, covenant, or condition herein contained shall not be deemed to be a waiver of or alter, affect, or prejudice any other remedy or other rights or remedies to which the Optionee may be lawfully entitled for the same default or breach and any waiver of any subsequent default or breach by the Optionor nor entitle the Optionor to any similar indulgence heretofore granted. -279- COUNCIL - JULY 13, 2004 Page 4 19. The Optionor agrees to comply and to make reasonable efforts to cause its subcontractors to comply with all Town of Aurora By-laws now or hereinafter in force with respect to the said Lands and the Adjoining Lands and with respect to actions taken in connection with the subject matter of this Agreement. IN WITNESS WHEREOF the undersigned have hereunto set their hands and seals through its officers duly authorized in that regard: THE CORPORATION OF THE TOWN OFAURORA Tim Jones, Mayor Bob Panizza, Town Clerk TERRA AURORA ILA. amen ario Giorgio ®� Title: Chief Executive Officer .• • • . Name: Frank Giorgio • • • • • ' ' ' Title: President (I/We have the authority to bind the Corporation) i COUNCIL - JULY 13, 2004 Schedule "A" Legal Description of Lands Page 5 All and singular that certain parcel or tract of land and premises situate, lying and being in the Town of Aurora, in'the Regional Municipality of York, and being composed of: Part of Lot 87, Plan 246 Designated as Parts 1 and 2, 65R-27176 -281- COUNCIL - JULY 13, 2004 Schedule "B" Sketch of Works Page 6 -282- COUNCIL - JULY 13, 2004 AGENDA liE TOWN OF AURORA COUNCIL MEETING No. PL04-081- SUBJECT: Zoning By-law Amendment Application Preserve Homes Corporation Part of Lot 21, Concession 2 E.Y.S. File D14-16-03 FROM: Susan Seibert, Director of Planning DATE: July 13, 2004 RECOMMENDATION THAT report PL04-081 be received and that implementing Zoning By-law Amendment No. 4561-04.D be enacted. BACKGROUND Location/Land Use: The subject lands are located at the northeast corner of Bayview Avenue and Wellington Street East and are identified legally as Part of Lot 21, Concession 2 E.Y.S., as illustrated on the attached Figure 1. Parcel 1 is Lot No. 44 on draft approved plan of subdivision D12- 01-5A and Parcel 2 is a remnant parcel of land that was previously owned by the York Region District School Board. Surrounding Uses: To the North: Residential Under Construction; South: Wellington Street and proposed Magna Medical Centre; East: Approved Residential; and West: Approved Residential. Official Plan: Parcel 1, as identified on Figure 1, is designated "Low -Medium Density Residential' in Official Plan Amendment No. 30, which permits predominately at -grade housing forms such as single detached dwellings, duplexes, semi-detached dwellings, triplexes, quadruplexes, street rowhouses and/or block rowhouses. —283— COUNCIL — JULY 13, 2004 July 13, 2004 -2- Report No. PL04-081 Parcel 2 is designated "Medium -High Density Residential" in Official Plan Amendment No. 30, which permits a range of predominantly above -grade housing forms such as stacked rowhouses, terrace houses, maisonettes, and garden apartments. Zoning By-law: Parcel 1 is currently zoned "Detached Dwelling Second Density Residential Holding (H)R2- 79 Exception Zone" (Figure 2), which permits one detached dwelling per lot and home occupation uses, excluding a teaching and musical instruction studio. Parcel 2 is zoned "Rural General (RU) Zone" (Figure 2), which permits agriculture uses including farming, soil cultivation and livestock rearing, breeding, raising and training of farm animals and horses, churches or places of worship, home occupations, horseback riding clubs, farm greenhouses, and one single family dwelling including an accessory attached residential dwelling unit occupied by a person employed full time on the farm where the farm is not less than 40 hectares in area. Proposal: For Parcel 1, the applicant is proposing to amend the Zoning By-law from "Detached Dwelling Second Density Residential Holding (H)R2-79 Exception Zone" to "Detached Dwelling Second Density Residential Holding (H)R2-76 Exception Zone" (Figure 3). The purpose of the request is to accommodate a reduction in lot frontage realized by the applicant during calculation of the preliminary M-Plan for Lot 44 of draft approved subdivision D12-01-5A. The minimum required lot frontage in the R2-79 zone is 13.7 metres (45 ft), whereas Lot 44 will have a lot frontage of 13.1 metres (43 ft). For Parcel 2, the applicant is proposing to amend the Zoning By-law from "Rural General (RU) Zone" to "Detached Dwelling Second Density Residential Holding (H)R2-78 Exception Zone", "Row Dwelling Residential Holding (H)R6-49 Exception Zone", and "Open Space (0- 17) Exception Zone" (Figure 3). The applicant's proposal would ensure the completion of a single detached residential reserve block and the residential townhouse reserve blocks created through draft plan D12-01-5A, as illustrated on the attached Figure 2. The R6(49) Zone requires a minimum lot frontage of 6.0 metres per dwelling unit and a minimum lot size of 180.0 square metres per dwelling unit. Lastly, the 0-17 zone would permit the completion of a landscaped buffer strip along the north side of Wellington Street East, as approved in draft plan D12-01-5A. Background: The subject application was brought forward to the Council Public Planning Meeting of September 10, 2003. At the meeting, Council passed the following resolution: —284— COUNCIL — JULY 13, 2004 July 13, 2004 - 3 - Report No. PL04-081 "THAT staff work with the Applicant toward an implementing By-law under the direction of the Director of Planning and report back to Council". Parcel 1 With respect to Parcel 1, the proposed lot frontage is only 0.6 metres shorter than required by the existing zoning. At the time of the Public Meeting, Staff recommended that a site specific zone be created to recognize this deficiency instead of rezoning the lot to the (H)R2-76 category as proposed by the applicant. This was recommended because of the potential, under the R2-76 category, to create a lot with a frontage of 10.7 metres or 3.0 metres less than that which is currently required. However, since that time, the applicant has finalized the draft M-Plan for the subdivision and Staff is satisfied that the lot frontage of Parcel 1 will in fact be 13.1 metres. Therefore, Staff has no objection to the applicant's request to rezone the lands to a "Detached Dwelling Second Density Residential Holding (H)R2-76 Exception Zone'. Parcel 2 Draft plan of subdivision D12-01-5A abuts Parcel 2 to the west, to the north, and to the east. During the period in which the subdivision was being reviewed and approved, Parcel 2 was owned by the York Region District School Board and was used as a utilities building. Although Parcel 2 was not part of the draft plan of subdivision, provision for the future development of Parcel 2 was protected by establishing residential future development blocks adjacent to the west, north, and east sides of the property. As illustrated on Figure 2, the draft plan created one single detached residential future development block on the east side of Parcel 2 (the (H)R2-78 Zone) which requires a small triangular sliver of land to complete the lot (Figure 3). In addition, the draft plan includes two residential future development blocks of land that are currently zoned for townhouses on the west and north sides of Parcel 2. The plan envisioned that these future development blocks would be combined with the School Board lands to create two blocks of townhouses. Subsequent to the draft approval, the owner of the subdivision purchased the lands from the School Board and therefore, the subject rezoning application allows for the completion of Street "6" as shown on the draft plan by combining the subject lands with the future residential blocks on Plan D12-01-5A. In addition, rezoning the southern portion of Parcel 2 to the 0-17 zone would permit the completion of a landscaped buffer strip along the north side of Wellington Street East, as approved in draft plan D12-01-5A. —285— COUNCIL — JULY 13, 2004 July 13, 2004 - 4 - Report No. PL04-081 OPTIONS Council could deny the application; however, if this option is followed, Council should be cognisant of the Staff comments. FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS Not applicable. CONCLUSION With respect to Parcel 1, the applicant has requested that the property be rezoned to a zoning category that would permit a 10.7 metre lot frontage. The lot will actually have a frontage that is only 0.6 metres less than the required 13.7 metre lot frontage. Given that the lot is now shown on the draft M-Plan as having a frontage of 13.1 metres, Staff has no objections to the proposed "Detached Dwelling Second Density Residential Holding (H)R2- 76 Exception Zone" for the subject lands. With respect to Parcel 2, the applicant is proposing to rezone the lands to permit the completion of one single detached lot on draft plan D12-01-5A and to permit the completion of two townhouse blocks. The draft approved plan of subdivision that abuts the Parcel on three sides envisioned this development on the old School Board property. The subject rezoning application essentially allows for the completion of Street "6" as shown on the draft plan by combining the subject lands with the future residential blocks on Plan D12-01-5A. In addition, the proposed Open Space Buffer Block will ensure the completion of the landscaped buffer strip along the north side of Wellington Street East. Therefore, it is recommended that report PL04-081 be received and that implementing Zoning By-law Amendment No. 4561-04.D be enacted. LINK TO STRATEGIC PLAN The Strategic Plan contains objectives to ensure high quality, comprehensive community planning to protect the overall investment of citizens in the community. Critical review of the subject application through the Zoning By-IawAmendment processes will facilitate this objective. COUNCIL - JULY 13, 2004 July 13, 2004 - 5 - Report No. PL04-081 ATTACHMENTS Figures: Figure 1 - Location Plan Figure 2 - Existing Zoning Figure 3 - Applicant's Proposed Zoning PRE -SUBMISSION REVIEW Management Team Meeting - July 7, 2004 Prepared by. Michael Mallette, Acting Manager of Planning - Development Extension 4346 Si#sibirt M. .LP., R.P.P. Director of Planning -287-