Agenda - General Committee - 20051018GENERAL 00
AGENDA
NO.05-21
ITTEE
TUESDAY, OCTOBER 18, 2005
7:00 P.M.
COUNCIL CHAMBERS
AURORA TOWN NALL
PUBLIC RELEASE
14/10/05
TOWN OF AURORA
GENERAL COMMITTEE MEETING
AGENDA
NO. 05-21
Tuesday, October 18, 2005
7:00 p.m.
Councillor Vrancic in the Chair.
I DECLARATIONS OF PECUNIARY INTEREST
11 APPROVAL OFAGENDA
RECOMMENDED:
THAT the content of the Agenda as circulated by the Corporate Services
Department be approved as presented.
III DETERMINATION OF ITEMS REQUIRING SEPARATE DISCUSSION
IV ADOPTION OF ITEMS NOT REQUIRING SEPARATE DISCUSSION
V DELEGATIONS
(a) Mr. Greg Reid, Athletic Director, St. Andrew's College (pg. D-1)
and Representatives from Roger Neilson's Hockey Camp
Re: Item 10 - LS05-056 - Permitting of Ice
(b) Richard and Caroline Damecour (pg. D-2)
Re: Item 1 - BA05-010— Skateboard Ramps
(c) Mr. Kurt Irrcher (pg. D-3)
Re: Item 1 - BA05-010— Skateboard Ramps
General Committee Meeting No. 05-21 Page 2 of 5
Tuesday, October 18, 2005
(d) John and Heather Vincent (pg. D-4)
Re: Item 1 - BA05-010— Skateboard Ramps
(e) Mr. Victor Kalashnik (pg. D-5)
Re: Item 1 - BA05-010— Skateboard Ramps
VI CONSIDERATION OF ITEMS REQUIRING SEPARATE DISCUSSION
V11 OTHER BUSINESS, COUNCILLORS
Vlll IN -CAMERA
None
IX ADJOURNMENT
General Committee Meeting No. 05-21 Page 3 of 5
Tuesday, October 18, 2005
AGENDA ITEMS
1. BA05-010— Skateboard Ramps (pg. 1)
RECOMMENDED:
THAT Council receive report BA05-010 regarding the regulation of
skateboard ramps as information.
THERE IS NO PAGE 9
2. CS05-030 — Parking of Unlicensed Vehicles in Residential Areas (pg. 10)
RECOMMENDED:
THAT the report regarding Parking of Unlicensed Motor Vehicles in
Residential Areas be received for information, and that staff continue to
enforce the provisions of By-law 4370-02.P,
3. PW05-027 — Stormwater Management Remedial Strategy - (pg. 18)
Award of Contract for Professional Services
RECOMMENDED:
THAT Council authorize the Director of Public Works to execute an
Engineering Agreement between the Town of Aurora and XCG
Consultants Ltd. to complete a "Stormwater Management Remedial
Strategy for the Town of Aurora" at a price of $86,466.00 exclusive of
GST; and
THAT Council withdraw contract PW2004-54, entitled "Maintenance and
Monitoring of Stormwater Management Facilities in the Town of Aurora",
previously awarded to Cannington Excavating 1989 Ltd.
General Committee Meeting No. 05-21
Tuesday, October 18, 2005
Page 4 of 5
4. PL05-096 — Zoning By-law Amendment Applications (pg. 47)
Gathering Place of Aurora
210 Edward Street
Part of Blocks B&C, Plan 488
File D14-07-05
RECOMMENDED:
THAT Council approve By-law 4709-05.D, being a site specific rezoning
By-law to amend the Town of Aurora Zoning By-law 2213-78, as amended
(File D14-07-05).
5. PL05-098 — Proposed Zoning By-law Amendment Application and (pg. 55)
Plan of Subdivision Application
Chapman Court (Kylemore Homes)
Part of Lot 80, Concession 1, E.Y.S
Files D14-13-05A & D12-05-3A (Ref: D11-10-05)
RECOMMENDED:
THAT Council receive as information the following overview of an
Application to Amend the Zoning By-law and Plan of Subdivision
Application (Files D14-13-05A & D12-05-3A), and schedule these
applications for the Public Planning Meeting of November 23, 2005.
6. PL05-099 — Zoning By-law Amendment Application -Temporary Use (pg. 63)
La Maison Montessori School (Vic Priestly Demolition)
669 Wellington Street East, Aurora
Part of Lot 80, Concession 1, E.Y.S
File D14-10-05
RECOMMENDED:
THAT Implementing Zoning By-law 4707-05.D be scheduled for
enactment at the next Council meeting.
7. PL05-100 — Planning Applications Status List (pg. 71)
RECOMMENDED:
THAT the Planning Applications Status List be received as information.
General Committee Meeting No. 05-21
Tuesday, October 18, 2005
Page 5 of 5
E3
4
10
CS05-031 - Pending List
RECOMMENDED:
THAT CS05-031 be received for information purposes.
LS05-057 - Seniors' Centre Sponsorship
RECOMMENDED:
(pg. 106)
(pg. 130)
THAT Council approve the following sponsorship for rooms within the new
Seniors' Centre;
1. Deck - Aurora Home Hardware.
2. Lounge - McAlpine Ford -Mercury.
3. Activities Rooms A & B - Vic Priestly Contracting Ltd.
4. Kitchen "Belinda's Kitchen" - Hon. Belinda Stronach, MP
5. Workshop - First Pro Shopping Centres.
6. Games Room "Wycliffe Room" - Wycliffe Homes.
7. Reading Room - Ballymore Developments.
8. Crafts Room - Norma Jean Legge; and
THAT $91,000.00 be deducted from the fundraising target of $250,000.00
in support of these sponsorship donations.
LS05-056 - Permitting of Ice
RECOMMENDED:
(pg. 132)
THAT Council support the application of the Ice Allocation Policy
regarding the permitting of summer ice.
CC - OCTOBER 18. 2005
Delegation (a)
Panizza, Bob
From: Greg Reid j
Sent: Thursday, October 13, 2005 3:48 PM
To: Panizza, Bob
Cc: _
Subject: Request to speak at General Council
Dear Bob,
T just got off the phone with Mayor Jones and he informed me that I need to forward to you
my request to speak at General Council on Tuesday Oct. 18th. The following people would
like to be included in the delegation requesting to speak to the Agenda item regarding
Roger Neilson's Hockey Camp and/or The Murphy Hockey School: Greg Reid Marshall Starkman
Larry Bell Howie Grossinger Sol Birenbaum Ted Staunton Paul Bedford Dave Clements Larry
Pearson Linda Godel
Please confirm receipt of this email and that we have been given standing at General
Council.
Thank you,
Greg Reid
Athletic Director
St. Andrew's College
(905) 727-3178 ext. 2s8
www.sac.on.ca
DIM
GC - OCTOBER la, 2005
Delegation (b)
Panizza, Bob
From: Richard Bamecour
Sent: Tuesday, October 11, 2005 12:07 PM
To: Panizza, Bob
Subject: Monster Half Pipe Issue
Bob
My wife (Caroline Oamecour) and I would like to request delegate status for the upcoming City Council meeting at
7 PM on Tuesday October 18" to discuss the Monster half Pipe Issue at 50 Windham Trail,
10/11/2005
D-2
CC - OCTOBER 18, 2005
Delegation (c)
Panizza, Bob
From: kirmher'
Sent: Wednesday, October 12, 2005 12:48 PM
To: Pani=a, Bob
Subject: Delegate Status : Council Meeting, October 18th, 2005 - 7:00 p.m.
In the mailer re! HALF PIPE @ 50 Wynham Trail
I do request to be given Delegate Status for the
Council Meeting on October 181h, 2005 — 7:00 p.m.
Regard 460 Aurora, ON.,
10/12/2005 D 3
GC - OCTOBER 18, 2005
Panizza, Bob - Delegation (d)
From: John Vincent
Sent: Friday, October 14, euuo bRj Hiw
To: Panizza, Bob
Subject: [BULK] backyard 112 pipe
Importance: Loy„
M
My wife and T request delegate status for the upcoming City Council meeting at 7 PM on
Tuesday October lath to discuss the Monster half Pi a Issue a thanks far our cons' deration.., the new owners at 'Pe Trail. with
Vincent Jahn and Heather
Iml
GC - CCTOBER 18, 2005
Delegation (e)
Victor If�alaslwik
urorA a, Ontario
L4G-5M8
Atm. Town Clerk October 14, 2005
I am requesting permission to appear as a delegate on October 18, 2005 to discuss
the topic of skateboard ramps on resident properties as outlined in the report BA05010
11�4
Thank you
Victor Kalashnik
GC - OCTOBER 18, 2005
[A�M U"A
�.K,.
TOWN OF AURORA
GENERAL COMMITTEE REPORT No. BA05-010
SUBJECT: Skateboard Ramps
FROM: Leo J. Grellette, Director of Building Administration
DATE: October 18, 2005
RECOMMENDATIONS
THAT Council receive report BA05-010 regarding the regulation ofskateboard
ramps as information.
BACKGROUND
Council at its meeting of July 12, 2005 instructed staff to report back on what measures
can be taken to address the construction of skateboard ramps. The request resulted from
several complaints received by council regarding a skateboard ramp constructed in a
resident's backyard in Aurora. Staff in the Building Department have received two
complaints from residents.
While Council's resolution speaks only to the construction staff are of the feeling that part
of the discussion was around the regulation of the use as well.
COMMENTS
Staff had this matter before them as early as June 18th. On June 20th staff made some
enquiries to the Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing regarding the requirement for a
permit to construct a skateboard ramp. It would appear that this is not a designated
structure under the building code and therefore is not regulated. However, the construction
of the structure is not the real issue and it would appear from Figure 1 that the structure
may in fact be well built.
At the time of the complaint staff visited at the site and found that the accessory structure
met all the provisions of the Town's current zoning by-law in that it was approximately 3
metres from the rear yard and 1.5 metres from the side yard while the by-law requires 1.0
metres and 1.2 metres respectively. In addition the height of the structure is well below the
maximum height of 3.5 metres as permitted under the Town's zoning by-law. The Town's
by-law also regulates lot coverage which due to the large size of the lot at 50 Windham
Trail is not an issue.
GC - OCTOBER 18, 2005
October 18, 2005 - 2 - Report No. BA05-010
At about the same time staff from By-law Services were requested to monitor the noise
levels at the site. The conclusion of staff of by-law services was that there was no
reasonable grounds to charge the owners with a noise violation underthe Town's noise by-
law.
In reviewing this matter staff contacted Newmarket, King, Vaughan, Whithchurch
Stouffville, Markham and East Gwillimbury to enquire as to their process for regulating
such structures. It appears that none of the aforementioned have special regulatory
processes for the specific regulation of skateboard ramps although they all regulate
accessory structures.
Further concerns were raised in July and September of this year. The latest concerns
which were raised are with respect to privacy, noise and the unpredictability of the use.
Staff are unaware of any means to regulate the hours of use particularly when the use is in
respect to a resident's backyard. Staff from By-law Services have addressed the noise
issue and continueto monitorthis. Privacy is a difficult issue. As can be seen from figure 1
the trees in the rear yard adjacent to the ramp afford more privacy from the ramp than
there is from the raised deck along the rear of the home. The mere grade difference
between Windham Trail and Langman Place suggests that most of the homes on
Windham trail overlook the backyards of those homes on Langman Place.
Staff earlier reported to Council on the lighting issue and noted that permanent lights have
not been installed but staff did observe that there was what is referred to as a mechanic's
light hanging from a limb of the tree. The light was directed towards the ramp. In speaking
with the owner it was the owner himself that hung this light. Also in conversation the owner
noted that he constructed the ramp to keep his children off the streets and at home as
skateboarding had become a passion and there are no facilities within the community.
Staff would note that in their latest visit some of the privacy issues have been addressed
through the construction of a fence by the adjoining homeowner. However the fence
appears to be in excess of the maximum fence height of 2.Ometres permitted under the
Town's fence by-law.
While Council has requested that staff find a means to regulate this form of use staff are
concerned that there may be difficulty with the legal aspect of such a regulatory act. There
are a number of similar uses that could be seen to impact both noise and privacy such as
children's play houses, slides on swimming pools, above ground pools, trampolines, basket
ball hoops, backyard hockey rinks with boards, volley ball pits etc. any number of which
are generally temporary encompassing only a few months per year. While the list is not
exhaustive is does provide an indication of the potential regulatory nightmare that could
ensue.
Staff are not prepared to recommend that the current zoning by-law be amended to restrict
only the construction of skateboard ramps. Staff would further note that should council
instruct staff to restrict only skateboards that this would not assist in the current situation as
any by-law that would be enacted would not be retroactive and would render the
skateboard ramp legal non conforming.
2
GC - OCTOBER 18, 2005
October 18, 2005 - 3 - Report No, BA05-010
By-law Services have attended the property to inspect or listen to the noise created by the
ramp when it is in use. Based on the inspection, staff are not in a position to proceed with
any action under the Town's Noise By-law. This position is based on the fact that the ramp
is a permitted use and it is not being used at unreasonable hours of the day or night. In
addition when staff proceed with a prosecution, there must be a realistic expectation of
obtaining a conviction and based on the factors above, staff do not believe that the
expectation is realistic.
OPTIONS
Council could request that staff amend the zoning by-law to regulate the use of
skateboard ramps in residential areas. This may well result in similar requests
surrounding various other backyard recreational activities or a court challenge as to
the legality of such a regulation which would be difficult to defend in light of the lack
of regulation by other municipalities.
Council could receive this report and continue to monitor use and noise as well as
any activity from other municipalities. Should Council choose this then staff
recommend that Council, although the adjacent homeowners have not requested it,
grant a variance to permit a fence with a maximum height of 2.4 metres along the
rear of 50 Windham Trail in an effort to increase privacy for the adjacent
homeowner. This would permit the neighbour to retain the existing fence in its as
constructed state.
FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS
RM
CONCLUSIONS
That Council receive this report as information.
LINK TO STRATEGIC PLAN
N/A
ATTACHMENTS
Figure 1 — Ramp and Deck
Figure 2 — Issues as of Sept. 8, 2005
CC - OCTOBER 18, 2005
October 18, 2005 - 4 - Report No. BA05-010
ERE -SUBMISSION REVIEW
Management Team Meeting — October 12, 2005
Prepared by. Leo Grellette, ext. 4748
Leo J.
of Building Administration
0
�:�
� `�1
°
�.,: �
, ,'
ft.`
:ram
:4`,
+��..
. gf
��.
'�
a
r
r
�. .,
... � v'
r
� e
`jai" �y
ee r
�,
�� .'F�
�• r f
.. j
r
in.. �
f
�
r
. � :a
". ;
e
- • d
4
{o
1
4:
f a4
_s r
�.__.. ,r _
>e
i'
#-F
"� � j+�+r�y�,4 �,
�•.
a
j �M: ,.,
.f
� eye,'
.�r.wL.
f
R � s
,.
Y
t(
i
'k�y �p
6
e' • •t�i
e 4
��� % �`•
�'Rf'
oaf
�,
t
Yr'y d�
i
�
CC — OCTOBER 18, 2005
-----Original Message-----
From: Richard Damecour
Sent: Thursday, September 08, 2005 3:04 PM
To: 'Phyllis Morris'
Cc: 'kirrcher'
Subject: Half Pipe Issue
Phyllis
First I would like to thank you for your help dealing with the Half Pipe issue. I have been trying to
rationalize in my mind what is so upsetting about the half -pipe to the three houses that it backs onto (5, 7,
9 Langman Place).
The Main issue is the noise. It is impossible to be in any of the three backyards when
the half -pipe is in use. This is because the half pipe acts as a large speaker that takes
the noise from the skateboarders — amplifies it and then directs it to our three homes (my
house being the closest). Since the homes on Wyndham have walk -out basements the
noise from the half -pipe gets sent to their basement so it is not as noticeable. For
Langman Place residents the noise on the other hand gets projected directly into our
kitchens. When there are a number of young men on the half pipe the noise reaches a
level that makes it unpleasant for us to be in our kitchens.
2. The second issue is its unpredictable — We never know when the half pipe is going to
be used and now that they have added lights its use has been greatly extended. On
several occasions we will be sitting down for dinner (6 PM) and the half -pipe will start up.
Sometimes the noise drives us to finish or dinners on our front stairs. On a number of
other occasions we have invited friends over for a drink or dinner in our back yard and as
soon as our guests arrive the half pipe starts up and the dinner party has to be quickly
moved inside and sometimes has to be moved to the front of the house. It is a little like
the famous Chinese water torture where the unpredictability of the water drops hitting
your head is as bad or worse as the water drops themselves.
3. The third issue is privacy — With the addition of the second deck on the half pipe the
young men can stand above the top of our fence within a few feet of our property line (the
bottom of the deck is at the same level as the top of our fence). When the half -pipe is not
in use the young men like to hang-out on this deck and it makes my wife — who is often
home alone — very uncomfortable.
Leo Grellette informed me that the staff report is to go to City Council on October 181h. I hope to make the
above points clear to City Council at that time.
Richard Damecour, P.Eng, MBA
Figure 2 - Issues as of Sept. 8, 2005
GC - OCTOBER 18,
2005
r
,a
hTOWN OF AURORA
GENERAL COMMITTEE REPORT No. CS05-030
SUBJECT: Parking of Unlicensed Vehicles in Residential Areas,
FROM: Bob Panizza, Director of Corporate Services
DATE: October 18, 2005
RECOMMENDATIONS
THAT the report regarding Parking of Unlicensed Motor Vehicles in Residential
Areas be received for information, and that staff continue to enforce the
provisions of By-law 4370-02.P,
BACKGROUND
At the meeting of October 4, a presentation was made by a resident who expressed his
concerns regarding the enforcement provisions of the subject by-law. General Committee
subsequently requested staff to report back on the issue raised by the delegate, namely
the parking of an unlicensed motor vehicle in a residential area.
According to Section 2 of By-law 4370-02.P, a copy of which is attached as Appendix #1:
`All private property shad be kept clear of waste, and no person shall dump, place, deposit
or permit to be dumped, placed or deposited on any grounds, yards or vacant lots within
the Town of Aurora any refuse or debris and, without limiting the generality of the
foregoing, this shall include deserted or inoperable motor vehicles and parts thereof."
The by-law further defines an Inoperable Motor Vehicle as:
`A vehicle not having valid license plates which, by reason of age, appearance and
mechanical condition is, in the opinion of an inspector, not repairable to the extent
necessary to put it into roadworthy condition."
COMMENTS
Each summer, the By-law & Licensing Services Division regularly receives complaints
from residents regarding the parking of unlicensed and inoperable motor vehicles in
residential areas. In 2004, 22 complaints were filed, and in 2005,12 complaints were filed.
10
CC - OCTOBER 18, 2005
October 18, 2005 - 2 - Report No. CSO4-030
In June of this year enforcement staff embarked on an active program to address this issue
in advance of possible complaints being filed by residents. Through site visits, a total of
83 properties were identified as having unlicensed motor vehicles. Consequently Notices
of Violation were issued to these property owners and to date, 54 properties (65%) have
complied with the Town's request. Notwithstanding staff's inspections, complaints
continued to be filed by residents with the Town, as in the case of the delegate who had his
own unlicensed vehicle that was parked on the grass next to his driveway as shown on
Appendix #2.
The provision in the by-law relating to unlicensed vehicles is the only uniform method that
staff can utilize to ensure that vehicle owners comply with the Town's regulations. The
interpretation being that if the vehicle is unlicensed it consequently cannot be driven on a
public road and is therefore considered inoperable. However this is not to say that the
vehicle is not mechanically fit. In many cases property owners own a second vehicle that
is used on a periodic basis, i.e. their summer car or winter car. In all circumstances
whether the vehicle is mechanically fit or not, owners are given three options to consider in
order to comply with the by-law namely:
1. Obtain current/valid license plates for the motor vehicle, or
2. Park the unlicensed motor vehicle in the garage, or
3. Remove the unlicensed vehicle from the residential property
OPTIONS
In order to ensure compliance with the spirit of the by-law, it is necessary to maintain the
existing clause as drafted by legal counsel and incorporated in the by-law. Council may
choose not to enforce this condition of the by-law which will require an amendment to the
by-law in order to repeal this section.
FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS
Not applicable
CONCLUSIONS
It is staffs opinion that the by-law provides a clear and consistent interpretation with
respect to unlicensed & inoperable vehicles that are parked in residential areas for
extended periods of time. By removing or altering the provision of the by-law will
create an opportunity for a more subjective interpretation in determining whether a
vehicle is operable or not, which in turn may lead to more legal challenges in court.
GC - OCTOBER 18, 2005
October 18, 2005 - 3 - Report No. CSO4-030
LINK TO STRATEGIC PLAN
Goal A
To maintain a well -managed and fiscally responsible municipality.
ATTACHMENTS
Appendix #1 — By-law 4370-02.13
Appendix #2 — Unlicensed vehicle photos
PRE -SUBMISSION REVIEW
CAO Review Oct. 12, 2005
Prepared by: Bob Panizza, Director of Corporate Services
Bob Panizza It
Director, Corpora a Services
12
OC - OCTOBER 18, 2005 APPENDIX #1
THE CORPORATION OF THE TOWN OF AURORA
By4aw Number 4370-02.P
BEING A BY-LAW
requiring properties to be
maintained in a safe
condition and kept clear
of waste.
WHEREAS the Municipal Act R.S.O. 1990, c. M.45, Section 210, paragraphs 80, 82,
135 and 136, provides that the Council of any municipality may enact a by-law requiring
yards to be put in a safe condition, requiring and regulating the filling up, draining,
cleaning and clearing of any grounds, yards and vacant lots, and prohibiting the use of
land for the dumping or disposal of garbage refuse or domestic or industrial waste and
to prohibit littering of private and Corporation property and prohibiting the storing of
inoperative motor vehicles.
AND WHEREAS the Municipal Council of the Town of Aurora deems it necessary to
enact such a by-law;
NOW THEREFORE the Municipal Council of the Corporation of the Town of Aurora
enacts as follows:
DEFINITIONS
For the purpose of this by-law;
a) "Corporation" means the Corporation of the Town of Aurora.
b) "Property" shall mean any private or public lands including yards or
vacant lots.
c) "Provincial Offences Officer" means a person appointed by by-law of
the Corporation of the Town of Aurora as a Provincial Offences Officer
pursuant to the authority under s. 15 of the Police Services Act, R.S.O.
1990, c.P.15 or designated in writing by a Minister under Section 1(3) of
the Provincial Offences Act, R.S.O. 1990. C. P.33 as a Provincial
Offences Officer.
d) "Refuse" or "Debris"shall mean any waste material of any kind
whatsoever and without limiting the generality of the foregoing includes
rubbish, inoperative or unlicensable vehicles or boats and mechanical
equipment, automobile and mechanical parts, tires, furnaces, water and
fuel tanks, furniture, glassware, plastic, cans, garden refuse, grass
clippings, trees, tree branches, earth or rock fill, snow, materials from
construction or demolition projects, old clothing and bedding, refrigerators,
freezers, or similar appliances, whether operable or inoperable.
e) "Deserted Motor Vehicle" means a vehicle that has been left unattended
and that, in the opinion of the inspector, by reason of it's age, appearance,
mechanical condition, lack of license plates or invalid license plates,
appears to have been abandoned.
f) "Inoperable Motor Vehicle" means a vehicle not having valid license
plates which, by reason of age, appearance and mechanical condition is,
in the opinion of an inspector, not repairable to the extent necessary to put
it into roadworthy condition.
13
OC - OCTOBER 18. 2005
By-law No. 4370-02.P Page 3
Penalty
10. Every person who contravenes any of the provisions of this by-law is guilty of an
offence and upon conviction is liable to a fine pursuant to the provisions of the
Provincial Offences Act, as amended
11. By-law 3255-91 is hereby repealed.
READ A FIRST, SECOND AND THIRD TIME THIS 24t6DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2002,
C"
B. PANIZZA, TOWN CLERK
14
GC - OCTOBER 18, 2005
THE CORPORATION OF THE TOWN OF
AURORA
By-law Number 4429-03.P
BEING A BY-LAW to
amend By-law 4370-02.P
Being a By-law Requiring
Properties to be Maintained
in a Safe Condition and
Kept Clear of Waste.
WHEREAS Pursuant to Section 130 of the Municipal Act 2001, S.O. 2001, G. 25, a
municipality may regulate matters not specifically provided for in the Municipal Act
2001,or any other act for purposes related to the health, safety and well being of the
inhabitants of the municipality;
AND WHEREAS Section 427 of the Municipal Act 2001, S.O. 2001, c. 25, enables a
municipality by by-law to require that a matter or a thing be done and in default, the
work be done by the municipality at the person's expense and the costs be affixed to
the tax rolls and collecting them in the same manner as taxes;
AND WHEREAS the corporation of the Town of Aurora deems it to be necessary and
expedient to amend by-law number 4370-02.P;
NOW THEREFORE THE MUNICIPAL COUNCIL OF THE CORPORATION OF THE
TOWN AURORA ENACTS AS FOLLOWS:
1. That Section 1 of By-law 4370-02.P be amended and the following be added:
(h) Depression or Excavation shall mean a man made condition on
property that is capable of holding water for more than five (5)
consecutive days but does not include a storm water management
facility or a natural body of water.
(1) Medical Officer of Health means the Medical Officer of Health for the
Region of York;
G) Natural Body of Water refers to a creek, stream, bog, marsh, river,
pond or lake crated by the forces of nature and which contains water on
a regular basis.
(k) Owner means the person(s) that appears on the assessment rolls
of the Town of Aurora;
(1) Person includes a natural individual, corporation, partnership or
association;
(m) Standing Water means any water, other than a natural body of water,
that is found either on the ground or In refuse or debris as defined in
this by-law and contains or is likely to contain mosquito larvae.
15
GC - OCTOBER 18, 2005
By-law No. 4429-03.P
Page 2
That Section 1(d) be amended by inserting "...containers of any kind and un-
maintained garden fixtures" after "inoperable."
2. That Section 2 of By-law 4370.02.P be amended to add Section 2.1.
2.1 No person shall keep a property unless it is free of:
(a) depressions or excavations on the property capable of holding
standing water for more than five days;
(b) refuse or debris of any kind capable of holding standing water;
3. That Section 4 of By-law 4370-02.P be amended by adding Section 4.1.
4.1 No person shall keep a swimming pool, hot tub, wading pool, garden
fountain or artificial pond unless it is maintained in good repair and
working condition.
READ A FIRST, SECOND AND THIRD TIME THIS 27tb DAY OF MAY, 2003.
. j OR ANIZ, TOWN CLERK
F
GC - OCTOBER 18, 2005
rowN of AURORA. �
GENERAL COMMITTEE REPORT No. PW05-027
SUBJECT: Stormwater Management Remedial Strategy -Award of Contract for
Professional Services
FROM: W. H. Jackson, Director of Public Works
DATE: October 18, 2005
RECOMMENDATIONS
THAT Council authorize the Director of Public Works to execute an Engineerin
Agreement between the Town of Aurora
"Stormwater Management Remedial Stra
$86,466.00 exclusive of GST, and
g
and XCG Consultants Ltd. to complete a
fegy for the Town of Aurora" at a price of
THAT Council withdraw contract PW2004-54, entitled "Maintenance and Monitoring
of Stormwater Management Facilities in the Town ofAurora", previously awarded to
Cannington Excavating 1989 Ltd.
BACKGROUND
In 2001, the Town completed a Stormwater Management (SWM) Facility Maintenance and
Remediation Study which included the following works:
• A SWM facility database;
• . A detailed field survey of existing stormwater management facilities in the Town of
Aurora;
• A review of the maintenance requirements for each stormwater management facility
including a long-term maintenance strategy; and
• A list of facilities recommended for retrofits to improve water qualitylquantity
treatment capabilities.
In 2003, the Ministry of Environment (MOE) released a revised "Stormwater Management
Planning and Design Manual which is considered to be one step forward in the
evolutionary process of stormwater management techniques.
In the same year the Lake Simcoe Region Conservation Authority (LSRCA) released the
"State of the Lake Simcoe Watershed" under Phase 111 of the "Lake Simcoe Environmental
Management Strategy" program. The LSRCA study addresses issues associated with
development pressures and other stressors present within the Lake Simcoe watershed
ecosystem. It also encouraged the completion of urban strategies to address stormwater
runoff and the control of sediment and erosion as a result of urbanized areas.
m
CC - OCTOBER 18, 2005
October 18, 2005 .2. Report No. PW05-027
The Town of Aurora has been very active in oureffortsto maintain, and improve, the health
of the East Holland River watershed. In addition to our 2001 Study noted above, we have
retrofitted one storm water pond to include quality control and will include in the 2006
Budget funds to retrofit two more ponds. The Environmental Assessment and design for
these two ponds are complete and upon budget approval, tenders will be issued and the
subsequent report for contract award submitted to Council.
Given the release of the new MOE Design Manual and the State of the Watershed Study,
staff believe this is an opportune time to update the 2001 Study and to take the next logical
step, which is to evaluate the existing storm outfalls in the Town where no SWM controls
are in place to look at opportunities to retrofit them to provide quality controls. There are at
present over 100 storm sewer outfalls located in older parts of the Town which were
constructed prior to the implementation of requirements to provide SWM controls, and
which consequently drain directly into various receiving water bodies.
In consideration of the above, a Request for Proposals for a "Stormwater Management
Remedial Strategy" was issued to deal with the following matters:
1. An overview of the existing storm sewer outfalls;
2. Quantify those areas without any stormwater quality/quantity controls;
3. Identify potential locations for remedial water quality works;
4. Identify the quality/quantity controlled areas within the Town; and
5. An enhancement and update of the existing stormwater management facilities
database.
The study will be developed in two stages. Stage 1 will update the existing "wet/quality
facility" database and specifically deal with sediment accumulation, level of contamination,
sediment quality testing and recommendations for methods of disposal. Stage 2 of the
study will provide an update of the existing "dry/quantity facility" database. Also, in this
stage, stormwater outfalls and watershed areas will be established and identified on a GIS
database. Recommendations will be developed for the best stormwater management
practices for each untreated storm outfall.
Council may remember that in September 2004 Tender No. PW2004-54 entitled
"Maintenance and Monitoring of Stormwater Management Facilities in the Town of Aurora"
was awarded to Cannington Excavating 1989 Ltd. Although the project was awarded,
restructuring and internal organization issues within the contractor's firm significantly
delayed the start of the contract. Additionally, the price of the contract was based on
removal of sediment and dispose off -site based on "residential fill" criteria. Only after the
sediment had been removed and tested would the final cost of disposal be determined if
the sediment was, in fact, classified as industrial fill, non -hazardous or hazardous waste.
Given the contractor's delay in beginning the works, staff felt it was an opportune time to
reconsider and restructure the tender to provide more cost certainty for the sediment
removal and disposal works.
Taking all of the above factors into account, Tender No. PW2004-54 was not executed.
19
GC - OCTOBER 18, 2005
October 18, 2005 - 3 - Report No PW05-027
The reorganized contractor has not indicated interest in doing the work, and with further
information on sediment volumes and classifications thatwill be generated through the new
study, staff will be in the position to generate a tender that will provide more cost certainty
because the quality/classification of the excavated material will be known before firms are
asked to bid on removal and disposal.
COMMENTS
The Request for Proposals for a "Stormwater Management Remedial Strategy" was issued
on August 12, 2005 by the Town's Purchasing Division and closed on September 2, 2005.
A total of 29 companies picked up the documents. On September 2, 2005, a total of 8
proposals were submitted and opened as follows:
URS Canada Inc.
$32,905.00
Cansult Ltd.
$76,500.00
Totten Sims Hubicki (TSH)
$83,501.00
XCG Consultants Ltd.
$86,466.00
Aquafor Beech
$88,700.00
McCormack Rankin Corporation
$93,945.00
Greenland International
$139,095.00
CCL/IBI Group
$175,246.00
The proposals were evaluated by staff on the basis of the following criteria:
1) Staff qualifications and experience 30%
2) Technical elements of the proposal 45%
3) Proposal cost 25%
The low cost proposal, from URS'Canada Inc., did not meet the technical requirements for
the study and was not considered further. Of the remaining seven proposals, it is noted
that five were grouped fairly tightly between $76,500 and $93,945.
After reviewing the remaining seven proposals, the XCG Consultants Ltd. proposal
received the highest overall score. Two proposals were cheaper than XCG Consultants
Ltd., however based on the above selection criteria, XCG Consultants Ltd. presented a
proposal with superior technical elements and had assigned appropriately qualified staff to
this project.
XCG Consultants Ltd. provides a full range of environmental engineering services including
all aspects of stormwater master planning and preliminary design. XCG Consultants Ltd.
has a long history of successfully completing consulting assignments for government and
municipal clients across Canada. They recently completed the "Wet Weather Flow
Management Master Plan" (WWFMMP) for the City of Toronto which will provide the city
with a blueprint for future wet weather flow management, as well as the regeneration of
critical valley and stream habitats. XCG Consultants Ltd. proposal covered thoroughly all
elements noted in the RFP and their proposal's approach and methodology showed that
the company understood and can deliver what the Town is asking for. Their senior staff
K"
GC - OCTOBER 18, 2005
October 18, 2005 .4. Report No. PW05-027
has experience in many similar assignments completed for other agency and municipal
clients across Canada.
FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS
Although no specific capital project was identified in the 2005 Budget for this project, funds
are available in the Storm Sewer Reserve for this study.
OPTIONS
Council may not wish to proceed with this project.
CONCLUSIONS
A Request for Proposals entitled "Stormwater Management Remedial Strategy for the
Town of Aurora" was issued. The work resulting from this study will continue the Town's
efforts at maintaining, and improving, the water quality of our surface water courses.
The study will produce a strategy to improve the water quality by addressing all urban
stormwater inputs within our boundary and at the same time protect and enhance the
health of the East Holland River and its tributaries. The results of Stage 1 of the study will
be used to generate a tender contract for the removal of sediment from the Town's existing
wet SWM facilities.
The firm XCG Consultants Ltd. at its quoted price of $86,466.00 submitted the request for
proposal that received the highest overall evaluation marks based on standard prescribed
and advertised criteria.
LINK TO STRATEGIC PLAN
Goal "C" speaks to continuing the well -planned moderate growth of the Town. The
Strategic Plan includes the action to "address matters affecting public safety, property and
the environment and will formulate specific measures to deal with them."
ATTACHMENTS
• Appendix "A" — Request for Proposal
• Appendix "B" — Engineering Agreement
PRE -SUBMISSION REVIEW
Management Team Meeting — October 12, 2005
Prepared by: Anca Mihail, Municipal Engineer, ext 4383
W. H. Jacksti'n
Director of Public Works
21
GC — OCTOBER 18, 2005
APPENDIX "A"
RATION OF THE TOWN OF AURORA
DATE ISSUED: Friday, August 12, 2005
CLOSING DATE: Friday September 2 2005 12:00:00 NOON, local time,
Proposals are invited for engineering services to complete a Stormwater Management Remedial
Strategy for the Town of Aurora
GENERAL INFORMATION
Submissions (3 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, 2"d floor
1 Municipal Drive
Aurora, Ontario L4G 6J1
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 QUOTATIONS WILL NOT BE ACCEPTED. IF DOCUMENTS ARE BEING
RETURNED VIA COURIER, THE OUTSIDE ENVELOPE MUST INDICATE THAT THE CONTENTS ARE
QUOTATION DOCUMENTS.
The Corporation of the Town of Aurora reserves the right to accept any tender in whole or in part, whether the price
or prices be the lowest or not, and may reject any or all tenders, 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: Anca Mihail (905) 727-3123. Ext: 4383 and all
general purchasing inquiries to Katherine Bishop, (905) 727-3123, Ext 4121.
Itwe have carefully examined the documents and have a clear and comprehensive knowledge of the requirements and have submitted
all relevant data. ifwe agree, If selected, to provide those goods andfor services to the Town in accordance with the terms, conditions,
and specifications contained in the 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
NOTE: If this document has been sent to you electronically, please be advised that any changes to the original document MUST BE
HI -LIGHTED; otherwise your submission will be rejected.
R"
OC - OCTOBER 18, 2005
TOWN OF AURORA
PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT
TERMS OF REFERENCE
FOR
Stormwater Management Remedial Strategy
RFP #: PW2005-70
August 2005
23
GC - OCTOBER 18. 2006
TERMS OF REFERENCE
1.0 INTRODUCTION
The Holland River subwatershed is located in the southwest corner of the Lake Simcoe
watershed. It is composed of two major tributaries, the East Holland and the
Holland/Schoenberg Rivers. The East Holland River is the smaller of the two areas
draining approximately 243 km2 or 41 % of the total Holland River subwatershed area.
The East Branch of the Holland River originates in the Oak Ridges Moraine
approximately 15 km east of Aurora in the vicinity of Musselmans Lake (Figure 1). It
flows in a westerly direction until it reaches Bayview Avenue where it bends to the north
and passes through the Tows of Aurora and Newmarket. Ultimately, it joins with the
West Holland River downstream of the Holland Marsh and outlets into the area of Lake
Simcoe known as Cooks Bay.
The Town of Aurora is located almost entirely within the East Holland River
subwatershed. Human activities within the subwatershed have had a significant impact
on the health of the ecosystem.
Water quality within the headwaters of the East Holland River can be characterized as
good, with some headwater areas able to support a viable cold water fishery. However,
by the time the river reaches the urban fabric of Aurora and Newmarket water quality is
observed to deteriorate dramatically. In fact, water quality concentrations for sediment,
bacteria, and nutrients, like phosphorus, are seldom below the Provincial Water Quality
Objectives set for fresh water river systems. These pollutants can not only harm aquatic
life but also reduce the watercourse aesthetics and recreation potential.
One major source of pollution to the river was found to be from urban or built-up areas
through stormwater runoff. Urban stormwater runoff occurs as rain or melting snow
washes streets or parking lots clean of dirt and debris. In the past it was common
practice to drain this polluted water directly into the East Holland River via ditches,
drains, and storm sewers. Other conventional sources of pollutants such as sewage
treatment effluent or agricultural runoff within Aurora have been eliminated or are not
deemed significant. Therefore, efforts to clean up the Holland River need to focus on
improved management and control of urban stormwater runoff.
1.1 Project Justification
In consideration of the above, the Town of Aurora wishes to develop a strategy to
improve the water quality of the East Holland River by addressing urban stormwater
inputs. The following are the Term of Reference which details the goals, objectives and
activities that need to be completed to address the issue of urban stormwater runoff
within the Town's limits.
3
MH
GC - OCTOBER 18, 2005
1.2 Project Purpose
The goal of the Town's Stormwater Remediation Plan/Strategy is as follows:
To improve the quality of urban stormwater runoff from the Aurora area in order
to protect and enhance the health of the East Holland River and its tributaries.
A previous study completed in 2001 provided the following:
1. A stormwater management facility database. The database was built upon the
initial database completed by the Lake Simcoe Region Conservation Authority
(LSRCA) in their preparation of the East Holland River Subwatershed
Management Plan (LSRCA 2000), upgraded to 2001 and provided in Microsoft
Access format on CD-ROM.
2. A detailed field survey of existing stormwater management facilities in the Town
of Aurora. Sediment accumulation levels in the "wet" facilities were measured in
April 2001. The data collected during the field surveys was combined with data
gathered from the stormwatermanagement pond database and the overall
performance for each pond was determined.
3. A review of the maintenance requirements ,for each stormwater management
facility and a long-term maintenance strategy.
4. A list of facilities selected to undergo retrofit work for water quality/quantity
treatment capabilities. Five facilities have been selected to undergo retrofit work
as previously specified. These facilities are: (please see the. attached map with
the location of the stormwater management facilities)
pond NC2 located in Atkinson Park just southeast of the intersection of St.
John's Sideroad and Old Yonge Street.
• pond WC3 located south of Kennedy Street West at Deerhorn Crescent.
pond C1 located within the East Holland River floodplain, immediately
south of Wellington Street and east of Mary Street.
• pond NW1 located at the southeast corner of St. John's Sideroad and
McKinley Gate, and
pond SW2 located immediately east of Bathurst Street, north of McClellan
Way.
Of the 5 facilities identified above as possible retrofits in the 2001 study, one
facility, Kennedy Street West Pond (WC3), has been already retrofitted, and two
others, ponds NC2 and NW1, are going through the Environmental Assessment
and detail design process. All 5 facilities are to be excluded from the present
study.
17
25
CC - OCTOBER 18. 2005
In 2003 The Ministry of Environment (MOE) released a revised "Stormwater
Management Planning and Design Manual while LSRCA released the "State of the
Lake Simcoe Watershed" under Phase III of the "Lake Simcoe Environmental
Management Strategy" program.
The MOE Manual released in 2003 is considered to be one step forward in the
evolutionary process of stormwater management techniques, while the 2003 "State of
the Lake Simcoe Watersehed" addresses issues associated with development
pressures and other stressors present within the Lake Simcoe watershed ecosystem. It
also encourages the completion of urban strategies to address stormwater runoff and
the control of sediment and erosion as a result of urbanized areas.
Taking into account these two documents released by MOE and LSRCA, the proposed
study has to address the issue of stormwater runoff and its quantity/quality treatment
within the Town of Aurora's boundaries, including but not limited to:
1. An overview and update of the stormwater management facilities database.
2. An overview of the storm sewer outfalls.
3. Identify the quality/quantity controlled areas within the Town.
4. Identify the extent of areas without any stormwater quality/quantity controls, and
5. Identify potential locations for remedial water quality works.
2.0 PROJECT SCOPE
2.1 Project Elements
The study will be developed in 2 stages:
In Stage 1 the Consultant shall provide the necessary engineering services to carry out
the following:
1. An update of the existing "wet/quality control facility" database in the Town of
Aurora including but not limited to the: drainage areas, survey plans to confirm
volumes, elevations/inverts of inlets, outlets, headwalls, berms etc. This survey
work is to provide confirmation that facilities perform as specified by the design
and "as -built" drawings.
2. Sediment depth measurement in all "wet" facilities. All depth measurements and
elevations shall be certified by an Ontario Land Surveyor or Professional
Engineer licensed in the Province of Ontario. Sediment depth measurement
techniques may consist of one of the following methods:
® Disc and rocs measurement: measurement of the undisturbed sediment
layer is determined by means of lowering a disc attached to a string line or
pry
GC - OCTOBER 18, 2005
lightweight rod until it reaches the top of the sediment, and taking a
reading of the depth (see attachement - "Sediment Depth Measurement').
• Core sampling may also be used to determine sediment depth, but
allowances for sediment compaction during extraction must be considered
to avoid erroneous measurements. Depth sounding equipment may be
used but must be verified by physical depth measurements to ensure that
sediment and native layers are correctly distinguished.
3. Sediment testing in all wet facilities. Sediment testing pertains to the chemical
analysis of the sediment to be removed in order to determine the required
disposal methods and locations. A minimum of 3 successful sediment samples
must be collected from each facility and a bulk analysis compared with the MOE
"Soil, Ground Water and Sediment Standards for Use Under Part XV.1 of the
Environmental Protection Act", Table 2, entitled "Full Depth Generic Site
Condition Standards in a Potable Ground Water Condition" to determine if the
sediment should be classified as residential or industrial fill.
If the facility's sediment exceeds contaminant levels for industrial sites as
specified in the above -mentioned document, a leachate test must be performed
on the sample by an independent firm, in accordance with MOE Regulation
347/558 and the requirements set out by Ontario Regulation 153/04, or latest
amendment thereof. The leachate test will determine if the sediment that has to
be removed is non -hazardous or hazardous waste. The Consultant will provide
the Town with written documentation of the test results and clear indication
where the sediment should be disposed of.
Sediment shall be collected via core sampling methods, which should extract a
small portion of the native base to confirm that the full depth of sediment sample
has been collected.
4. Prepare a final Report detailing the condition of each facility surveyed, volume of
sediment accumulation, level of contamination, methods and locations of
disposal.
Stage 1 of the study is to be completed by December 16, 2005.
In Stage 2 the Consultant shall provide the necessary engineering services to carry out
the following:
1. An update of the existing "dry/quantity control facility" database in the Town of
Aurora including but not limited to the: drainage areas, survey plans to confirm
volumes, elevations/inverts of inlets, outlets, headwalls, berms etc. Survey work
to provide confirmation if facilities perform as specified by the design and "as -
built' drawings.
6
27
GC - OCTOBER 18. 2005
2. Collect, review, analyse, update and interpret the available information regarding
storm sewer outfalls including but not limited to: their condition, catchment areas,
existing quality controls, if any, (e.g. oil/grit separators) and level of treatment
provided.
3. Asses and compile existing information to produce a map of Aurora identifying all
sewersheds, storm sewer outfalls and stormwater management ponds (quantity
and quality).
4. Establish a G.I.S. (Geographic Information System) database for the stormwater
management controls (quantity and quality) within the Town of Aurora. The G.I.S.
database to include storm water management ponds, drainage basins, storm
sewer outfalls, the extent of areas without stormwater quality/quantity controls.
Please note the standard the Town of Aurora is currently using for G.I.S. is
ArcView 9.0 (shapefile).
5. Research and . summarize state-of-the-art best management practices for
stormwater quality and quantity treatment and evaluate their suitability for each
untreated storm outfall based on site conditions and benefit/cost ratios.
6. Prepare a final Report summarizing the information gathered and make
recommendations regarding the stormwater management remedial strategies for
uncontrolled urban areas and storm sewer outfalls.
7. Submit the report to any affected agency for their review and approval as
necessary. While it is not necessary to obtain approvals for specific activities and
projects outlined in the report, it is necessary that the affected agencies approve
in principle the recommended upgrade strategy. This may include but not limited
to, the Lake Simcoe Region Conservation Authority (LSRCA), the Ministry of The
Environment and Energy (MOEE), the Ministry of Natural Resources (MNR), and
the Department of Fisheries and Oceans (DFO).
Stage 2 of the study is to be finalized by June 30, 2006.
2.2 Administration
In conducting this work, Mr. David Atkins, Manager of Engineering Services, will be
responsible for the general direction of the project. During the course of the work
outlined in this document, the Consultant shall, in addition to the tasks outlined above,
perform the following activities as necessary:
(1) Liase with other government agencies, public officials, and private individuals as
required;
it
GC - OCTOBER 18, 2005
(2) Develop a workable schedule for the project and for the delivery of the report and
monitor the conformance of project activities to this schedule throughout the
course of the project; and
(3) Hold project meetings with the Town of Aurora. These meetings shall be
scheduled on a regular basis, or as required.
3.0 PROJECT ORGANIZATION
Under the terms of the proposal, the Town will retain an engineering consultant to carry
out the required design components of the project. The total project costs shall be
broken down into its various components in the proposal. The cost breakdowns shall
include details of person -days and payroll costs for principals, management and
technical staff, and must relate to the activities outlined in the proposal.
A legal agreement will be executed based on the cost submitted by the Consultant in
the proposal. During the course of the project, any deviations which could incur
additional expenses or cause delays to the project from the services specified in this
Terms of Reference, the Consultant's, proposal,and the executed legal agreement,
must receive prior written approval from the Director of Public Works and/or Council.
4.0 REQUIREMENTS OF CONSULTANT
The Consultant shall submit three (3) copies of the proposal and also include the
following information in their proposal:
(1). A work schedule for the project that commits to the required completion date;
(2) The names, qualification, and experience of the staff to be assigned to the
project;
(3) A detailed breakdown of services to be provided by the Consultant, including the
fee per item and the "upset limit" which shall not be exceeded without the
authorization of the Director of Public Works due to a change in the scope of the
work;
(4) A premium rate for principals, and an hourly rate for the key staff to be assigned
to this project;
(5) A list of expected disbursements to be included in the project and their expected
cost, including those of any sub -contractors;
E
29
GC - OCTOBER 18, 200S
(6) Confirmation that the Consultant can provide insurance as per the Town's
requirements, being general liability insurance ($2,000,000) and professional
liability insurance ($2,000,000);
(7) Examples of similar types of projects carried out in recent years by the
Consultant and, in particular, by the staff who will be working on this project; and
(8) Any other projects with which the Consultant is involved, and not employed by
the Town of Aurora, which may be deemed to be a possible conflict of interest.
5.0 PROPOSAL EVALUATION
The proposals will be evaluated by staff from the Public Works Department, who shall
make a recommendation to the Director of Public Works or Council, as required, for
award of this project. The evaluation matrix that will be used in evaluating these
proposals is as follows:
1. Experience and Qualifications of Firm and project team members 30%
2. Evaluation of the Proposal and Deliverables 45%
3. Cost Estimate, including disbursements 25%
6.0 ADDITIONAL INFORMATION
The "Stormwater Management Facility Maintenance and Remediation Study" completed
in November 2001 includes an inventory of the existing stormwater management
facilities in the Town of Aurora. This information, in the form of a Microsoft Access
database, will be made available to the wining candidate.
7.0 DELIVERABLES
The following are considered deliverables to the Town of Aurora:
1. Copies of all digital files created for the purpose of the study (Stage 1 and 2).
2. Five paper copies of the final reports (Stage 1 and 2). Electronic copies of the
reports on disc in a format acceptable to the Town of Aurora.
8.0 REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL RULES, TERMS AND CONDITIONS
8.1 Submission Deadline
Three (3) 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 Cover Sheet.
Deliver the completed packaged prior to 12:00:00 noon on the closing date to the
address stated on the cover page.
9
30
GC - OCTOBFR 18, 2005
Proposals will not be considered unless:
• Received by the date and time specified; and
• Received at the address specified on page 1; and
• Contain 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 Public Works staff for evaluation.
8.2 Addendum
An addendum, should one be necessary, will be issued to all companies 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.
8.3 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.
8.4 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.
All correspondence, documentation 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
W1
31
OC - OCTOBER 18, 2005
Freedom of Information & Protection of Privacy 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.
8.5 Town's Right to Reject
The Town, at its discretion may: select any one 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.
8.6 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 Agreement.
8.7 Indemnity
The successful Proponent will be required to indemnify the Town for any loss, costs,
claims or damages arising from the award of this contract.
8.8 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.
ii
32
GC — OCTOBER 18. 200S
8.9 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 Town
and the successful Proponent executes an Engineering Agreement with the Town.
The successful Proponent will be required to enter into an Engineering Agreement
satisfactory to the Town.
8.10 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.
8.11 Municipal Freedom of Information & Protection of Privacy Act
PLEASE NOTE that materials supplied in response to a Request for Proposal become a
record of the Town and is subject to the Municipal Freedom of Information and
Protection of Privacy Act. If you have any questions with regard to this policy, please
contact the Municipal Clerk (Telephone: 905-727-1375).
9.0 Attachments
• Figure 1 — Lake Simcoe Subwatersheds
• List of Stormwater management facilities in the Town of Aurora
• Stormwater management facilities: summary of existing conditions.
• Map - Location of the stormwater management facilities.
• Map - Location of stormceptors.
• Sediment depth measurement — typical pond shown
SAPublic Works\General Folders\E05 Environmental Monitoring\SWM Study 2005\RFP Terms of Reference.doc
IPA
33