The URL can be used to link to this page

AGENDA - General Committee - 20200218 General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, February 18, 2020 7 p.m. Council Chambers Aurora Town Hall Public Release February 11, 2020 Town of Aurora General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, February 18, 2020 7 p.m., Council Chambers Councillor Gilliland in the Chair 1. Approval of the Agenda 2. Declarations of Pecuniary Interest and General Nature Thereof 3. Community Presentations 4. Delegations (a) Kevin Gage and Christine Zarebski, representing Aurora Community Tennis Club (ACTC) Re: Request to Revise Public Court Times and Usage 5. Consent Agenda 6. Advisory Committee Meeting Minutes Recommended: That the following Advisory Committee Meeting Minutes item, A1, be received: A1 . Finance Advisory Committee Meeting Minutes of January 28, 2020 General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, February 18, 2020 Page 2 of 5 Recommended: 1. That the Finance Advisory Committee meeting minutes of January 28, 2020, be received for information. 7. Consideration of Items Requiring Discussion (Regular Agenda) R1. OPS20-001 – Fleet Lifecycle Analysis and 2019/2020 Capital Projects Recommended: 1. That Report No. OPS20-001 be received; and 2. That this report satisfy Council’s conditional budget approval of the 2019 list of Capital Fleet Projects as presented in Tables 2 and 3 in a total amount of $825,000 to be funded by $390,000 from the Fleet Repair and Replacement and $435,000 from the Services Related to a Highway Development Charge reserves; and 3. That the 2020 list of Capital Fleet Projects, as presented in Tables 4 and 5, in a total amount of $1,214,000 to be funded by $1,104,800, $60,000 and $50,000 from the Fleet Repair and Replacement, Growth & New, and Services Related to a Highway Development Charge reserves respectively, be approved. R2. FIN20-006 – Transition to Prudent Investor Regime Recommended: 1. That Report No. FIN20-006 be received; and 2. That the proposed Investment Policy Statement, attached as Appendix 1 be approved; and 3. That the Director of Finance – Treasurer be authorized to execute the ONE Joint Investment Board Agreement, subject to the final form and content of the agreement being to the satisfaction of the Director of Finance – Treasurer and the Town Solicitor; and General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, February 18, 2020 Page 3 of 5 4.That the Director of Finance – Treasurer be authorized to execute an Initial Formation Agreement with the other Founding Member Municipalities to establish a joint investment board, subject to the final form and content of the Initial Formation Agreement being to the satisfaction of the Director of Finance – Treasurer and the Town Solicitor; and 5.That a by-law be enacted to authorize a joint investment board to manage the Town’s long-term investments under the Prudent Investment; and 6.That after the ONE Joint Investment Board Agreement has been executed by ONE Joint Investment Board and all of the Founding Member Municipalities, a by-law be enacted to authorize the Town’s investments under the Prudent Investment regime. R3. PDS20-015 – Master Transportation Study Update Final Report Presentation to be provided by Jonathan Chai, Project Manager, HDR Corporation. Recommended: 1.That Report No. PDS20-015 be received; and 2.That Council endorse the recommendations of the Master Transportation Study Update, in principle, subject to individual project review as part of the Capital Budget process and update the 10-Year Capital Plan accordingly; and 3.That staff be directed to circulate the Master Transportation Study Update to York Region and relevant Town’s divisions. R4. CMS20-006 – Tennis/Pickle Ball Court Permits Recommended: 1.That Report No. CMS20-006 be received; and General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, February 18, 2020 Page 4 of 5 2.That the revised Policy No. CORP-10-Sports Field and Park Use Policy be approved as presented; and 3.That the costs for new signage be funded from the Council operating budget contingency fund. R5. FIN20-003 – Development Charge Deferral for Major Office Space Recommended: 1.That Report No. FIN20-003 be received; and 2.That staff proceed with the development of a policy for the deferral of Development Charges for Major Office Space. R6. PDS20-013 – Application for Zoning By-law Amendment Morgan Planning 2 Willow Farm Lane File Number: ZBA-2019-02 Recommended: 1.That Report No. PDS20-013 be received; and 2.Zoning By-law Amendment application File Number ZBA-2019-02 to rezone a portion of the subject lands from ‘ER - Estate Residential Exception Zone (73)’ to ‘R2 - Detached Second Density Residential Exception Zone (74)’ be approved; and 3.That water and sewage capacity for three (3) persons, equivalent to servicing one (1) single detached unit, be allocated to the future severed lot; and 4.That the Zoning By-law amendment be presented at a future Council meeting. 8.Notices of Motion (a)Councillor Humfryes Re: Open Cousins Drive Railway Crossing General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, February 18, 2020 Page 5 of 5 9. New Business 10. Public Service Announcements 11. Closed Session 12. Adjournment Delegation Request 7KLV'HOHJDWLRQ5HTXHVWIRUPDQGDQ\ZULWWHQVXEPLVVLRQVRUEDFNJURXQGLQIRUPDWLRQ IRUFRQVLGHUDWLRQE\HLWKHU&RXQFLORU&RPPLWWHHVRI&RXQFLOPXVWEHVXEPLWWHGWRWKH &OHUN¶VRIILFHE\WKHIROORZLQJGHDGOLQH D.m.2QH ()%XVLQHVVDay Prior to the Requested Meeting Date Council/Committee Meeting DQGDate: Subject: Name of Spokesperson: Name of Group or Person(s) being Represented (if applicable): Brief Summary of Issue or Purpose of Delegation: Please complete the following: +DYH\RXEHHQLQFRQWDFWZLWKD7RZQVWDIIRU &RXQFLOPHPEHUUHJDUGLQJ\RXUPDWWHURILQWHUHVW"<HV ܆܆1R ܆ ,I\HVZLWKZKRP"'DWH ܆ ,DFNQRZOHGJHWKDWWKH3URFHGXUH%\ODZSHUPLWVILYHPLQXWHVIRU'HOHJDWLRQV /HJLVODWLYH6HUYLFHV &OHUNV#DXURUDFD 7RZQRI$XURUD -RKQ:HVW:D\%R[ $XURUD21/*- February 18, 2020 Request to revise public court times and usage. Kevin Gage/Christine Zarebski Aurora Community Tennis Club (ACTC) The Aurora Community Tennis Club is requesting a redistribution of the prescribed hours of public access to the tennis courts, as detailed in the attachment to this submission request. ✔ John Firman, Manager of Business Support February 3, 2020 ✔ General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, February 18, 2020 Delegation (a) Page 1 of 2 Introduction: The Aurora Community Tennis Club (ACTC) is requesting a redistribution of the prescribed hours of public access to the tennis courts. Background: ACTC is a community tennis club utilizing three courts permitted seasonally by the Town of Aurora. ACTC’s obligations entail providing public access to the courts at pre-determined times. In September of 2019, a new Board was elected at ACTC with a mandate to revitalize the club, increase membership and enhance programming for all ages and skill levels. In conjunction with this vision, a club professional has been retained to provide lessons, clinics, coaching and summer camps. It is important to note that historically public usage of the courts has been minimal, both during the weekdays and on the weekends. Request: 1. In order to facilitate the operation of summer camps and team practices, the ACTC Board is requesting that on Monday and Tuesday, public access hours be shifted from 9.00 a.m.- 12.00 p.m. to 12.00 p.m.-3.00 p.m. 2. In order to allow for lessons and clinics during prime time weekend hours, the ACTC Board is requesting that the existing weekend hours for public access be redistributed. The total number of hours of public access to the courts will remain unchanged. The redistribution will benefit both ACTC and members of the public. Varying the scheduled court times available to the public will result in more flexibility and options for play. As well, it will provide ACTC with the opportunity to provide club programming and lessons on Saturday and Sunday afternoons. Please refer to the chart below for proposed weekend hours. 3. In order to maintain consistency, we are requesting that these amended public access hours take effect throughout the entire playing season,(May 1-Sept. 30). Summary: Day Current Public Access Proposed Amendment Impact on Public Access Hours Monday Court 3 9.00-Noon Court 3 Noon-3.00 p.m. 0 Tuesday Court 3 9.00-Noon Court 3 Noon-3.00 p.m. 0 Saturday Court 1, 2, 3 3.00 p.m-6.00 p.m. Court1-3.00 pm.-6.00 pm Court 2-3..00 pm.-9.00 pm Court 3- ACTC 0 Sunday Court 1, 2, 3 3.00 p.m-6.00 p.m. Court 1- 3.00pm.-7.00 pm Court 2- 2.00pm.-7.00 pm Court 3-ACTC 0 Conclusion: The Board requests and thanks the general Committee of Council for its consideration and support of the proposed amendments to the public access hours, (as summarized above), to the tennis courts at ACTC. General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, February 18, 2020 Delegation (a) Page 2 of 2 Town of Aurora Finance Advisory Committee Meeting Minutes Date: Tuesday, January 28, 2020 Time and Location: 5:45 p.m., Holland Room, Aurora Town Hall Committee Members: Councillor John Gallo (Chair), Councillor Michael Thompson, Mayor Tom Mrakas Member(s) Absent: None Other Attendees: Keith Taylor, Investment Manager, ONE Investment, Colin Macdonald, Investment Services Manager, Municipal Finance Officers’ Association of Ontario, David Waters, Acting Chief Administrative Officer, Robin McDougall, Director of Community Services, Rachel Wainwright-van Kessel, Director of Finance, Jason Gaertner, Manager, Financial Management Services, Tracy Evans, Financial Management Advisor, Laura Sheardown, Financial Management Advisor, Ishita Soneji, Council/Committee Coordinator Councillor Thompson called the meeting to order at 5:45 p.m. Appointment of Committee Chair Moved by Mayor Mrakas Seconded by Councillor Thompson That Councillor Gallo be appointed as Chair for Year 2020 of the Finance Advisory Committee 2018-2022 Term. Carried Councillor Gallo assumed the Chair at 5:46 p.m. General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, February 18, 2020 Item A1 Page 1 of 4 Finance Advisory Committee Meeting Minutes Tuesday, January 28, 2020 Page 2 of 4 1. Approval of the Agenda Moved by Mayor Mrakas Seconded by Councillor Thompson That the agenda as circulated by Legislative Services be approved. Carried 2. Declarations of Pecuniary Interest and General Nature Thereof There were no declarations of pecuniary interest under the Municipal Conflict of Interest Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. M.50. 3. Receipt of the Minutes Finance Advisory Committee Meeting Minutes of December 18, 2019 Moved by Councillor Thompson Seconded by Mayor Mrakas That the Finance Advisory Committee meeting minutes of December 18, 2019, be received for information. Carried 4. Delegations None 5. Consideration of Items The Committee consented to consider the items in the following order: Items 2, 1, and 3. 1. Review of Detailed Financial Budget Information Re: Community Services Staff presented an overview of the line-by-line analysis and year-to-date comparison of the final approved 2019 budget for the Community Services department, including detailed explanations regarding the highlighted budget General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, February 18, 2020 Item A1 Page 2 of 4 Finance Advisory Committee Meeting Minutes Tuesday, January 28, 2020 Page 3 of 4 variances. Staff responded to questions and provided details on the budget variances for leases, federal grants, and tax rate stabilization contributions. It was mentioned that the department has noted a recent history of revenue surpluses and is working towards aligning its revenue budgets based on historical trends, and noted that the Facilities budget would be streamlined in the future. Moved by Councillor Thompson Seconded by Mayor Mrakas 1. That the comments and suggestions of the Review of Detailed Financial Budget Information for Community Services be received and referred to staff for consideration and action as appropriate. Carried 2. FAC20 -001 – FAC Review of Prudent Investor Regime Staff provided an overview of the staff report providing details on the benefits of investing under a prudent investor regime, modelling of the expected returns under this regime, and comparison of historical rates of returns for various investment portfolios as managed per the Legal List and the regime. It was noted that quarterly reports to the Finance Advisory Committee has been added to the draft investment policy. Mr. Keith Taylor, Investment Manager, ONE Investment, and Mr. Colin Macdonald, Investment Services Manager, Municipal Finance Officers’ Association of Ontario, presented a draft investment plan for the Town’s funds not required immediately, and outlined the specific risk tolerances and projected return on investments. The Committee sought clarification on the annual return expectation range mentioned in the Municipal Client Questionnaire and the probability of incurring loss, and staff noted that a risk aversive investment plan could be considered and updated as needed. The Committee was in agreement with a report to a future General Committee meeting and requested that a side-by-side comparison of the Town’s current investment model’s historical returns and the new prudent investor regime including the costs and risks, and information regarding ONE JIB’s cost recovery framework be included in the forthcoming report to Council. General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, February 18, 2020 Item A1 Page 3 of 4 Finance Advisory Committee Meeting Minutes Tuesday, January 28, 2020 Page 4 of 4 Moved by Mayor Mrakas Seconded by Councillor Thompson 1. That Report No. FAC20-001 be received; and 2. That the comments and suggestions regarding the Prudent Investor Regime be received and referred to staff to be incorporated into a report to General Committee. Carried 3. 2020 Work Plan for Finance Advisory Committee Staff provided a brief overview of the work plan. The Committee requested that the February 11, 2020 meeting be rescheduled due to lack of quorum on the scheduled day, and staff agreed to follow up. Moved by Councillor Thompson Seconded by Mayor Mrakas 1. That the proposed 2020 Work Plan for the Finance Advisory Committee be received; and 2. That the 2020 Work Plan be approved. Carried 6. New Business The Committee referred to Item 2 and suggested that background information on the ONE Investment organization be included in forthcoming report to Council for information purposes for the members of public. 7. Adjournment Moved by Mayor Mrakas Seconded by Councillor Thompson That the meeting be adjourned at 6:50 p.m. Carried General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, February 18, 2020 Item A1 Page 4 of 4 Town of Aurora General Committee Report No. OPS20-001 Subject: Fleet Lifecycle Analysis and 2019/2020 Capital Projects Prepared by: Sara Tienkamp, Manager Parks & Fleet Department: Operational Services Date: February 18, 2020 Recommendation 1. That Report No. OPS20-001 be received; and 2. That this report satisfy Council’s conditional budget approval of the 2019 list of Capital Fleet Projects as presented in Tables 2 and 3 in a total amount of $825,000 to be funded by $390,000 from the Fleet R&R and $435,000 from the Services Related to a Highway DC reserves; and 3. That the 2020 list of Capital Fleet Projects, as presented in Tables 4 and 5, in a total amount of $1,214,000 to be funded by $1,104,800, $60,000 and $50,000 from the Fleet R&R, Growth & New and Services Related to a Highway DC reserves, respectively be approved. Executive Summary This report provides further details from the Fleet Management Strategy (FMS) specific to the Fleet Lifecycle Analysis and Long Term Capital Plan and 2019/2020 Capital Budget project details for the Fleet Division including the By-law, Facilities, Parks, Roads and Water/Wastewater Divisions: • Lifecycle Analysis combined with Fleet Analytics review software is used to support the Fleet Management Strategy • Lifecycle Analysis methodology will assist in long term capital planning allowing for vehicles to be replaced at the optimal time in their lifecycle. • Fleet Repair & Replacement Reserve requires $2,767,300 in additional funding as a result of more accurate accounting of actual fleet that exists as well as implementation of FMS. • Managers examined divisional fleet assets and investigated if any efficiencies could be achieved, as per FMS recommendations. • Staff recommend that the hold on the 2019 Capital Fleet replacement be lifted and the 2020 Capital Fleet Replacement be considered for approval. General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, February 18, 2020 Item R1 Page 1 of 86 February 18, 2020 Page 2 of 11 Report No. OPS20-001 Background At its December 10, 2019 meeting, Council carried the following motion: 1. That Report No. OPS19-024 be received; and 2. That the recommendations from the Richmond Sustainability Initiatives (RSI), Fleet Management Strategy, be endorsed in principle and staff report back on financial implications of the individual components of the strategy. Analysis Lifecycle Analysis combined with Fleet Analytics review software is used to support the Fleet Management Strategy As referred to in the previous Report No. OPS19-024 Fleet Management Strategy, Richmond Sustainability Initiatives (RSI) provided a Life Cycle Analysis and Long-Term Capital Plan with a Fleet Analytics Review (FAR) software program. This system allows staff to optimize the vehicle lifecycles based on historical data provided by the consultant in combination with real tracked data from Aurora’s Fleet, including service levels, operating costs, fuel consumption and greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. In addition, it assists staff in making informed business and financial decisions around long-term capital planning. Lifecycle Analysis methodology will assist in long term capital planning allowing for vehicles to be replaced at the optimal time in their lifecycle The approach to Life Cycle Analysis (LCA) is structured and applies specific principals within the FAR program. This allows staff to determine the best time to replace vehicles/equipment based on equipment age, mileage, operating costs, utilization etc. Example below is of a lifecycle analysis chart illustrating the optimal year for replacement based on age, operating costs and ownership costs. General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, February 18, 2020 Item R1 Page 2 of 86 February 18, 2020 Page 3 of 11 Report No. OPS20-001 RSI determined that utilizing mileage to evaluate lifespans is not ideal for Aurora due to our small geographic makeup. Our fleet vehicles typically would reach end-of-life, prior to hitting mileage thresholds of 200,000 - 250,000 km on an average ten (10) year lifecycle. As such, RSI recommends vehicle age be applied when determining replacement life cycles. Mileage at intervals of 20,000 – 25,000 km can be used by mechanical staff to evaluate vehicles during their lifespans. The FAR software is very comprehensive and detailed but there are some limitations as it does not take into consideration physical condition of the vehicles. The data from the program is to be utilized in conjunction with top-to-bottom vehicle evaluations performed by our licensed mechanics. This software is currently populated with Canadian municipal peer data on vehicles as Aurora does not currently track vehicle data. Eventually, as staff focus on data collection of actual vehicle repairs/costs within a Fleet Maintenance Management System, the relevant information will be transferred to FAR to reflect the Town vehicle information specifically and to assist with lifecycle/planning. Employing the current available peer data, RSI has suggested optimal lifecycles for the different classes of vehicles. It is recommended Fleet extend the current policy of the eight (8) year retention by one (1) to four (4) years. It should be noted that vehicles will start to receive condition assessments 2-3 years prior to the lifecycle year the vehicle class is due for replacement to determine if vehicles should be replaced ahead of schedule due to condition or kept longer. Staff have adopted this concept for the classes of vehicles, with some exceptions such as: General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, February 18, 2020 Item R1 Page 3 of 86 February 18, 2020 Page 4 of 11 Report No. OPS20-001 Class 7/8 Trucks (6 ton Heavy Plow Trucks) RSI suggests the lifecycle be extended by three (3) to four (4) years. Our experience indicates vehicle downtime and repair costs are significant once the trucks surpass eight (8) years. As the trucks are integral to maintaining service levels and safe roads, the trucks will remain on the current eight (8) year replacement cycle. Turf Mowers (Wide area and Zero turn) These pieces of equipment are heavily utilized to support service level standards and ensuring sports facilities are available to the public. A five (5) and six (6) year cycle is the optimal lifespan of these types of equipment based on maintenance history and is the typical lifespan within other municipalities. RSI also recommends this lifecycle. As staff begin to track real data within the Fleet Maintenance Management system and preventive maintenance programs are expanded and improved, planned lifecycles could potentially be expanded. The lifecycle analysis chart, as illustrated earlier, will be included as part of future capital project requests in future for Fleet. This will specifically support the business decision, minimizing downtime, operational expenses and return on investment. Fleet Repair & Replacement Reserve requires $2,767,300 in additional funding as a result more accurate accounting of actual fleet that exists as well as implementation of FMS Utilizing its FAR software, RSI undertook an analysis of the Town’s fleet based upon its current business as usual eight (8) year lifecycle. It also analyzed the impact on the fleet should its recommended extended lifecycles be applied. RSI also undertook an analysis of the Town’s existing asset information in an effort to ensure that it was accurate and captured accordingly. Attachment #1 presents the Fleet R&R reserve’s health up until 2030 as per the Town’s ten (10) year projected fleet requirements as they were presented in the recently approved 2020 Capital Budget upon the Town’s present repair and replacement lifecycle strategy. Attachment #2 presents the Fleet R&R Reserve’s health up until 2030 as per the Town’s eleven (11) year projected fleet requirements based upon RSI’s recommended extended lifecycles up to a maximum of twelve (12) years. General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, February 18, 2020 Item R1 Page 4 of 86 February 18, 2020 Page 5 of 11 Report No. OPS20-001 It should be noted that these forecasts do not include any planned future Growth and New fleet asset acquisitions. As can be seen from Attachments #1 and #2, the total fleet R&R requirements grow by $2,767,300 when the Fleet Management Strategy is applied. The impact to the reserve over the presented 12 year planning horizon is significant, leaving the reserve underfunded by a total of $1,916,900 at the end of 2030. Staff will address this underfunded balance through a reallocation of available funding from the other R&R reserves. Table 1 provides a summary of this impact. Table 1 Fleet R&R Strategy Total 12 Year Requirements Ending 2030 Reserve Balance Current $ 5,455,200 $1,030,600 Proposed 8,222,500 (1,916,900) Difference $ 2,767,300 Increase (2,947,500) Reduction In 2020 staff plan to review and improve the Town’s capital planning framework. This work will establish the building blocks to develop a more robust reserve funding strategy to ensure the financial sustainability of its long term capital plan. The reserve funding strategy will include a detailed analysis of that the Town’s current and longer term capital cash flow requirements. The analysis will include the re- balancing of the Town’s existing reserves as well as adjustments to its future capital reserve funding strategy. Some of the factors that have contributed include: • 10 year capital forecast for replacements had omissions and did not include all Fleet assets. • Assets with lifecycles occurring more than once in the 10 year capital plan not being reflected accurately (e.g. turf mowers with 5 year lifecycle). • Future forecasted costs not increasing proportionately in the later years due to inflation. Now reflected more accurately and consistently through FAR. • The asset value was not always reflective of the actual replacement cost. Review of FAR data will occur regularly during yearly capital and values updated accordingly moving forward. General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, February 18, 2020 Item R1 Page 5 of 86 February 18, 2020 Page 6 of 11 Report No. OPS20-001 Managers examined Divisional Fleet assets and investigated if any efficiencies could be achieved, as per FMS recommendations Fleet requested that Managers with Fleet vehicles and equipment undertake a detailed review at their vehicle needs in an effort to find potential efficiencies and redundancies as per the FMS. The exercise is the first of what will become a routine practice as the divisions were requested to take the following into consideration: • Right size of vehicle for job details • Reduce spares, the “just in case vehicles” • Potential of cross-divisional vehicle use • Redundancies – vehicle no longer required due to changes in work place functions/service levels etc. This initial exercise found the following efficiencies: Roads and Parks Divisions Each division owns and operates a backhoe loader for a total of two (2) units. It was determined one (1) backhoe could be utilized between the divisions, optimizing its uptime in the field and results in only one backhoe in the fleet to be replaced in 2020. Facilities Division Staff have determined a spare, “just in case”, ice resurfacer could be traded in and not replaced. Existing ice resurfacer could be moved from one arena to another should a breakdown occur. This should not impact arena bookings with some efficient coordination. Water/Wastewater Division This business unit has a very specialized vacuum/flusher truck. The vacuum portion of the unit is under-utilized and associated works can be easily contracted when required. As such, it was decided that the combination unit was not required and that a straight flusher truck would better suit the business requirements. Staff recommend disposal of this vehicle once a flusher truck is purchased. General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, February 18, 2020 Item R1 Page 6 of 86 February 18, 2020 Page 7 of 11 Report No. OPS20-001 This exercise by staff illustrates efficiencies can be achieved. Moving forward fleet will request managers look at their individual assets regularly to determine needs. Staff recommend that the hold on the 2019 Capital Fleet replacement be lifted and the 2020 Capital Fleet Replacement be considered for approval The FMS report recommends the Town resume and continue capital investment in new vehicles to refresh and modernize the fleet allowing for growth needs to be met and current maintenance service level standards to be maintained. Making use of the FAR software data and the revised lifecycles as per the recommendations, it was established that 27 units are either due or past due for replacement. Each vehicle up for capital replacement was physically assessed by our mechanical staff on condition to inform or confirm decisions on replacement. Attachment #4 is an example of the evaluation form used by staff examples have been included for vehicles requiring and not requiring replacement based on condition. These individual assessments assisted staff in making well informed decisions and it was concluded that only 25 units should be replaced. The remaining vehicles have been deferred to be re-evaluated in the future as currently they hold value to the business. One specific exception is Parks #201, a 2011, ½ ton truck. This truck is in good condition and viable within the workplace. While it has not met its lifecycle threshold it has been decided that it will be replaced in 2020 ahead of schedule. This business decision was made to support two divisions. Rather than trade-in the vehicle, it will be retained and utilized for the Fleet mechanical staff/supervisor where the wear and tear is far less than in Parks and the vehicles condition can be closely monitored. This has eliminated the need for a new additional vehicle in the fleet to support staff and as a result the capital project for a fleet division vehicle in the 2020 Growth and New budget has been removed. As such, staff recommend that the hold on the ten (10) 2019 Fleet Capital purchases be lifted. In addition, it is recommended that Council consider the seventeen (17) vehicle/equipment projects as part of 2020 Fleet Capital (Attachment #5) for approval. Advisory Committee Review Not applicable. General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, February 18, 2020 Item R1 Page 7 of 86 February 18, 2020 Page 8 of 11 Report No. OPS20-001 Legal Considerations None. Financial Implications Table 2 – 2019 Repair & Replacement Capital Projects The financial impact for the vehicle/equipment capital investment for 2019 and 2020 is as follows: Table 3 - 2019 Growth & New Capital Projects 2019 – Total investment for replacement and growth and new vehicles $ 825,000. Costs are funded from the following sources: • Repair and Replacement will be funded from the Fleet Reserve - $390,000 • Growth and New will be funded from the Services Related to a Highway DCs - $435,000 Project Number Description Amount 34220 GMC/K3500 (#17-20) 85,000 34221 Kubota 4x4 Tractor (#599-19) 45,000 34228 Ice Resurfacer (#595-19) 90,000 34409 Smart Car Replacement (#400-19) 50,000 71112 Ford 350 Dump Truck (#226-19) 60,000 71119 Tractor – JD/4320 (#240-19) 60,000 Total $390,000 Project Number Description Amount 34187 4 Ton Truck 50,000 34188 New Snow Blower Attachments 150,000 34422 Additional Vehicle – By-Law Services 60,000 34173 New Trackless Sidewalk Utility Vehicle 175,000 Total $435,000 General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, February 18, 2020 Item R1 Page 8 of 86 February 18, 2020 Page 9 of 11 Report No. OPS20-001 Table 4 - 2020 Repair & Replacement Capital Projects Project Number Description Amount 34222 Roads – Chev/1500 (#3-20) 51,200 34223 Roads – Chev/1500 #5-20) 51,200 34425 Water – ¾ Ton Cargo Van (#7-20) 50,000 34430 Roads – ¾ Ton Pick Up (#22-20) 50,000 34440 Roads – 6 Ton Diesel Dump with Sander (#33-20) 240,000 34458 Roads – Solar Powered Signs (#140, 141, 142, 143- 20) 100,000 34465 Facilities – ¾ Ton Pick Up Truck (#503-20) 40,000 71116 Parks – Back Hoe 420E IT & Rotary Broom Attachment (#238-20, #392 – 20) 205,000 71118 Parks – Tractor – JD/5225 (#241-20) 87,000 71121 Parks – 1 Ton Water Truck (#207-20) 61,400 71122 Parks – ¾ Ton Pick Up Truck (#212-20) 51,200 71132 Parks – Line Paint Trailer & Sports Field Line Painter (#121-20, #243-20) 35,800 71134 Parks – ¾ ton Pick Up Truck (#201-20) 50,000 71144 Parks – Grass Crew Trailer (#214-20) 20,000 71171 Box Blade Attachment (#276-20) 12,000 Total $1,104,800 Table 5 - 2020 Growth & New Capital Projects Project Number Description Amount 24023 Cameras for Parking Enforcement 60,000 34106 Patrol Truck 50,000 Total $110,000 2020 – Total investment for replacement and growth and new vehicles - $1,214,800. Costs are funded from the following sources: • Repair and Replacement will be funded from the Fleet Reserve - $1,104,800 • Growth and New will require a total of $110,000 (Growth and New Reserve $60,000, Services Related to a Highway DC Reserve $50,000) The 2019 and 2020 fleet requirements as identified in Attachment #2 are accurate. However, the presented 2021 to 2029 capital requirements in this attachment may be understated by as much as $2 million. These capital requirements will be finalized as part of the Town’s updated Ten (10) year Capital Plan which will be presented to General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, February 18, 2020 Item R1 Page 9 of 86 February 18, 2020 Page 10 of 11 Report No. OPS20-001 Council in the fall. As part of this same exercise, staff will adjust the Town’s reserve funding strategy accordingly in order to fund any identified fleet requirement increases. Communications Considerations There is no external communication required. Link to Strategic Plan This project supports the Strategic Plan Goal of Supporting an Exceptional Quality of Life for all by improving transportation, mobility and connectivity. This project maintains a well-managed and fiscally responsible Municipality. Alternative(s) to the Recommendation None. Conclusions The fleet Life Cycle Analysis Long-Term Capital Plan and supporting FAR software is in support of the over arching Fleet Management Strategy. This document and software will streamline current asset management practices and create a more efficient fleet management approach built on optimal life cycling, utilizing real data. This will help guide the Divisions and Fleet into the future, maximizing uptime of vehicles to support service levels in a fiscally responsible manner. Attachments Attachment #1 – Reserve Health – Tax Based Fleet R&R (Original Service Standards) Attachment #2 – Reserve Health – Tax Based Fleet R&R (New Fleet Service Standards) Attachment #3 – Vehicle Evaluation Examples Attachment #4 – 2020 Capital Projects Attachment #5 – Fleet Life Cycle Analysis Long Term Capital Plan Previous Reports OPS2019-008 Fleet Consultant Terms of Reference, April 16, 2019 General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, February 18, 2020 Item R1 Page 10 of 86 General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, February 18, 2020 Item R1 Page 11 of 86 General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, February 18, 2020 Item R1 Page 12 of 86 General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, February 18, 2020 Item R1 Page 13 of 86 $WWDFKPHQW General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, February 18, 2020 Item R1 Page 14 of 86 General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, February 18, 2020 Item R1 Page 15 of 86 General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, February 18, 2020 Item R1 Page 16 of 86 General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, February 18, 2020 Item R1 Page 17 of 86 $WWDFKPHQW General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, February 18, 2020 Item R1 Page 18 of 86 General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, February 18, 2020 Item R1 Page 19 of 86 General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, February 18, 2020 Item R1 Page 20 of 86 General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, February 18, 2020 Item R1 Page 21 of 86 General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, February 18, 2020 Item R1 Page 22 of 86 General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, February 18, 2020 Item R1 Page 23 of 86 General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, February 18, 2020 Item R1 Page 24 of 86 General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, February 18, 2020 Item R1 Page 25 of 86 General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, February 18, 2020 Item R1 Page 26 of 86 General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, February 18, 2020 Item R1 Page 27 of 86 General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, February 18, 2020 Item R1 Page 28 of 86 General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, February 18, 2020 Item R1 Page 29 of 86 General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, February 18, 2020 Item R1 Page 30 of 86 General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, February 18, 2020 Item R1 Page 31 of 86 General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, February 18, 2020 Item R1 Page 32 of 86 General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, February 18, 2020 Item R1 Page 33 of 86 General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, February 18, 2020 Item R1 Page 34 of 86 General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, February 18, 2020 Item R1 Page 35 of 86 General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, February 18, 2020 Item R1 Page 36 of 86 General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, February 18, 2020 Item R1 Page 37 of 86 General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, February 18, 2020 Item R1 Page 38 of 86 General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, February 18, 2020 Item R1 Page 39 of 86 General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, February 18, 2020 Item R1 Page 40 of 86 General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, February 18, 2020 Item R1 Page 41 of 86 General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, February 18, 2020 Item R1 Page 42 of 86 General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, February 18, 2020 Item R1 Page 43 of 86 General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, February 18, 2020 Item R1 Page 44 of 86 General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, February 18, 2020 Item R1 Page 45 of 86 General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, February 18, 2020 Item R1 Page 46 of 86 General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, February 18, 2020 Item R1 Page 47 of 86 General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, February 18, 2020 Item R1 Page 48 of 86 General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, February 18, 2020 Item R1 Page 49 of 86 General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, February 18, 2020 Item R1 Page 50 of 86 General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, February 18, 2020 Item R1 Page 51 of 86 General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, February 18, 2020 Item R1 Page 52 of 86 General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, February 18, 2020 Item R1 Page 53 of 86 General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, February 18, 2020 Item R1 Page 54 of 86 General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, February 18, 2020 Item R1 Page 55 of 86 Final Report November 2019 Fleet Life Cycle Analysis Long-Term Capital Plan REPORT ON LIFE CYCLE ANALYSIS FOR THE TOWN OF AURORA, ONTARIO PREPARED BY RICHMOND SUSTAINABILITY INITIATIVES – FLEET CHALLENGE $WWDFKPHQW General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, February 18, 2020 Item R1 Page 56 of 86 THE TOWN OF AURORA LIFE CYCLE ANALYSIS AND LONG TERM CAPITAL PLAN - 2 - Executive Summary he Town of Aurora operates a diverse fleet including pickups, vans and SUVs, medium and heavy- duty trucks and mounted equipment. The fleet includes the types of work equipment essential to serve the Town’s population of 55,4451 residents, their homes and businesses. In 2019, Aurora engaged Richmond Sustainability Initiatives – Fleet Challenge team (RSI-FC) to review the on-road vehicle fleet, apply Life Cycle Analysis and provide vehicle replacement recommendations in a five-year horizon. The following report summarizes our findings and recommendations. Methodology and Approach In general, as commercial vehicle fleets age, higher operating expenses are incurred due to increasing levels of reactive repairs (unplanned, breakdowns). As well, due to decreased reliability, downtime costs for spare/loaner vehicles also increases as does the cost of loss of productivity for the drivers who are dependent on fleet vehicles to perform their daily work routines. The Town of Aurora Fleet Dept. strives to maintain its fleet in a safe and reliable condition and in doing so reduces its downtime costs. Nevertheless, even when minimized, downtime costs are unavoidable; for a municipality, they can be substantial. Ongoing, uninterrupted capital re-investment in modernizing the fleet is critical to any organization that depends on a reliable fleet of vehicles to achieve its objectives and mission, as is the case for all municipalities including the Town of Aurora. As shown in Figure 1, fleet management is a complex juggling act. Capital investment, operating expenses and depreciation, preventive maintenance levels, fuel consumption, aging of the fleet, availability, utilization, emissions and inflation are interconnected issues. Making a change to any one of these key considerations impacts all of them. For example, deferred capital spending will result in an aging fleet. An aging fleet will result in higher reactive repair rates, more downtime, higher fuel consumption, increased operating costs and ultimately a larger overall fleet size to allow for more spare vehicles to compensate for the reduced reliability of primary vehicles. Counter to this, if vehicles are replaced too soon, value may be lost. The key to success is knowing the optimal economic lifecycle for each type of vehicle in the fleet, then with that information, balancing go-forward capital spending to align with service level (uptime) and operating expense and other important success measures. 1 Census Profile, Canada 2016 Census. Statistics Canada. T Figure 1- Fleet Management Juggling Act General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, February 18, 2020 Item R1 Page 57 of 86 THE TOWN OF AURORA LIFE CYCLE ANALYSIS AND LONG TERM CAPITAL PLAN - 3 - Life cycle analysis (LCA) is a structured approach to determine the best time to replace vehicles and equipment in terms of age, mileage or other pertinent factors. LCA provides the empirical justification for replacement policies and facilitates the analysis and communication of future replacement costs. Figure 1: Life Cycle Analysis Example (below) illustrates the concept of LCA. As a vehicle’s age at retirement increases, ownership costs decrease and operating costs increase. The ideal time to replace vehicles is when the rise in operating costs begins to outweigh the decline in ownership costs. Figure 1: Life Cycle Analysis Example LCA is based on average costs and utilization rates for each category of vehicles and as so provides a credible guideline to optimal vehicle replacement cycles. LCA does have limitations, since it’s outcomes are based on average cost data for each category of vehicles. Some vehicles that are in poor or unsafe condition may require replacement before the LCA- calculated age criteria is met. Conversely, some vehicles that exceed the criteria may still be in good condition and not warrant replacement due to low usage, or recent refurbishment, therefore the recommended replacement criteria should be used as a guideline. By following the LCA guidelines, the physical condition of each unit should be assessed case by case by trained and knowledgeable staff who are familiar with each unit’s usage and maintenance history before replacement decisions are finalized. Data Challenges General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, February 18, 2020 Item R1 Page 58 of 86 THE TOWN OF AURORA LIFE CYCLE ANALYSIS AND LONG TERM CAPITAL PLAN - 4 - The discipline of completing fleet lifecycle analysis is dependent on actual historical cost data. LCA modeling software is designed and intended to be populated with a fleet’s actual historical cost data. Without having a fleet’s actual cost data and LCA, vehicle replacements decisions are often based on intuition and personal observations - essentially the sentiments of someone who has a high degree of familiarity with the fleet. Oftentimes, we’ve observed that “guesstimates” made by seasoned fleet staff can have a high degree of accuracy, but in today’s business world, ‘gut’ feelings do not stand up to scrutiny and must be backed up by analytical data. The Town of Aurora does not currently make it a practice to record, track or tally its vehicle repair and maintenance costs for each vehicle. This is a gap that presents a formidable challenge to completing lifecycle analysis. As a workaround, RSI-FC employed Canadian municipal peer fleet average cost data from our proprietary database. This data has been accumulated by our team over more than 14 years and represents the results of fleet reviews and analyses we have completed for dozens of Canadian cities, towns and regions. Being the amalgam of data from almost 50,000 municipal vehicles it was determined to be a suitable proxy for the Town’s actual information. Our recommendation to the Town is that staff should, as soon as possible, resume the best management practice of tracking cost data for each unit as soon as possible. Such cost information can then be used for future LCA profiling of the fleet, to assess progress in terms of cost management and for many other reasons (as described more fully in our separate “Best Management Practices Review” report). Modern Vehicles Today’s vehicles are built better and last longer than ever before. With the right levels of preventive maintenance, operating conditions and driver behaviors, vehicle service lives can often be extended longer than in the past. The life cycle analysis completed in this report optimizes vehicle life cycle costs based on vehicle age. Vehicle age is the best replacement criteria for the Town of Aurora, given its low average utilization rates. For high mileage vehicles, regardless of their age in model-years, it is recommended that the Town of Aurora should evaluate vehicle condition at thresholds of 20,000 km/yr. for light-duty vehicles and 25,000 km/yr. for medium and heavy-duty vehicles with a view to potential early replacement. This should take place on a case-by-case basis as vehicles approach these thresholds.\ The recommended vehicle replacement criteria based on the analysis completed is detailed within this report. Where recommendations are made to consider extending lifecycles we suggest a cautious approach. Vehicles approaching end of life should be assessed case by case – a thorough ground-up and top-down physical assessment of vehicle condition, and this would serve to inform and confirm decisions around their life cycles. General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, February 18, 2020 Item R1 Page 59 of 86 THE TOWN OF AURORA LIFE CYCLE ANALYSIS AND LONG TERM CAPITAL PLAN - 5 - Recommendations Overall it is recommended to: x Consider increasing the planned lifecycle for Pickup Trucks by 1 to 3 years 2 x Consider extending the planned lifecycles for Vans by 2 years2 x Consider extending the planned lifecycles for Class 3 Trucks by 2 to 3 years2 x Consider extending the planned lifecycles for Class 4 and 5 Trucks by 1 to 32 years x Consider extending the planned lifecycles of Class 7 and 8 Trucks by 3 to 42 years x Regularly revisit lifecycles and LCA models as more data becomes available. … 2 Relative to Aurora’s current 8-year vehicle replacement policy General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, February 18, 2020 Item R1 Page 60 of 86 THE TOWN OF AURORA LIFE CYCLE ANALYSIS AND LONG TERM CAPITAL PLAN - 6 - TABLE OF CONTENTS Executive Summary .............................................................................................................................. - 2 - Methodology and Approach .......................................................................................................... - 2 - Data Challenges ............................................................................................................................ - 3 - Modern Vehicles ............................................................................................................................ - 4 - Recommendations ................................................................................................................................ - 5 - 1.0 Introduction and Context ................................................................................................................ - 7 - Aurora Fleet Profile ........................................................................................................................... - 7 - Vehicle Categories, KMs-travelled, Age ............................................................................................ - 8 - 2.0 Fuel Use and Kilometers-Travelled Statistics................................................................................... - 9 - Current Aurora Planned Lifecycles .................................................................................................... - 9 - 3.0 LCA Methodology ................................................................................................................... - 10 - The Life Cycle Cost Curve ................................................................................................................ - 10 - Key Parameters and Assumptions ................................................................................................... - 11 - FAR Software and Long-Term Capital Planning.............................................................................. - 13 - Vehicle Replacement Criteria .......................................................................................................... - 13 - Life Cycle Analysis ........................................................................................................................... - 14 - 4.0 Life Cycle Analysis Results ....................................................................................................... - 16 - 5.0 LCA and Long-Term Capital Planning ........................................................................................... - 20 - Downtime and Fleet Reliability ....................................................................................................... - 25 - Synopsis.............................................................................................................................................. - 25 - Conclusion .......................................................................................................................................... - 26 - Appendix “A” – LCA for Pickups .......................................................................................................... - 27 - Appendix “B” – LCA for Vans ............................................................................................................... - 28 - Appendix “C” – LCA for Class 3 Trucks................................................................................................. - 29 - Appendix “D” – LCA for Class 4-5 Trucks ............................................................................................. - 30 - Appendix “E” – LCA for Class 7-8 Trucks ............................................................................................. - 31 - General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, February 18, 2020 Item R1 Page 61 of 86 THE TOWN OF AURORA LIFE CYCLE ANALYSIS AND LONG TERM CAPITAL PLAN - 7 - 1.0 Introduction and Context he Town of Aurora operates a diverse fleet vehicle fleet of light-duty vehicles including pickups, vans, and SUVs plus medium and heavy-duty trucks and mounted equipment. The fleet includes the types of work equipment essential to serve the Town’s population of 55,4453 residents, their homes and their businesses. Life Cycle Analysis (LCA) provides empirical justification for replacement polices and facilitates the analysis and communication of future replacement costs. LCA will provide Aurora with the necessary information to support, guide and justify either existing or new replacement practices as well as insight into future replacement costs and operating expenses. In 2019, Richmond Sustainability Initiatives – Fleet Challenge (RSI-FC, FC) was commissioned by Aurora to review the on-road vehicle fleet and provide concomitant recommendations regarding current replacement cycles and go-forward recommendations. The approach and results of this exploration are detailed in subsequent sections. Aurora Fleet Profile The fleet is owned (no vehicles are leased or rented) by the Town of Aurora and comprised primarily of diesel and gasoline-powered vehicles and equipment. For benchmarking purposes, to provide “apples to apples” peer fleet comparisons, in our review we categorized Aurora’s vehicles into industry-standard categories. The same categorization protocol is also employed by the provincial and federal government transportation Ministries and all auto/truck manufacturers. While this protocol is employed universally by the auto industry it may provide less than apt descriptions for completed vehicles after they have been fitted with specialized equipment used by Aurora. For this reason, in the accompanying Fleet Analytics Review (FAR) reports we added a secondary method of grouping the fleet by the categories defined and readily recognizable by Aurora staff (for example, salt/sander, dump truck etc.) … 3 Census Profile, Canada 2016 Census. Statistics Canada. T General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, February 18, 2020 Item R1 Page 62 of 86 THE TOWN OF AURORA LIFE CYCLE ANALYSIS AND LONG TERM CAPITAL PLAN - 8 - Vehicle Categories, KMs-travelled, Age As shown in Table 1: Fleet Profile by Standard Categories (below), Aurora vehicles in our LCA review included these types. When compared to a peer group of Canadian municipalities, the Aurora fleet is, on average, older by one model year. Annual utilization by kilometers-travelled is ~40 % less 4 than the peer group. In the table the average kilometers-driven and ages are shown. Age and accumulated mileage directly impact uptime/availability and as we will demonstrate in this report, operating expenses. Table 1: Fleet Profile by Standard Categories Category Aurora- Average Annual KMs Travelled Municipal Peer Group Fleet Average Annual KMs Travelled Aurora – Average Unit Age (model years) Municipal Peer Group Fleet Average (model years) Car 2,300 15,036 11 4 Pickup (Light Duty) 8,705 15,739 6 4 Van (Light Duty)11,765 12,686 3 3 Class 3, 4 & 5 Truck (Medium Duty) 7,323 12,995 8 6 Class 7 & 8 Truck (Heavy Duty) 4,758 29,980 4 7 Group Data5 8,421 14,889 6 5 … 4 Note: Utilization by average kilometers-travelled for peer fleets as shown in Table 1 represents data for numerous Canadian fleets and should be treated as a relative measure. Regional, vocational, geographical, fleet vehicle mix and climatic conditions must all be considered before making assessments or comparisons. 5 Note: Average also includes Aurora’s SUVs, vans and one Class 6 truck. General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, February 18, 2020 Item R1 Page 63 of 86 THE TOWN OF AURORA LIFE CYCLE ANALYSIS AND LONG TERM CAPITAL PLAN - 9 - 2.0 Fuel Use and Kilometers-Travelled Statistics he fuels consumed by the Aurora fleet in the one-year review period were fossil-based gasoline, diesel and propane (for some equipment). The total vehicle kilometers-travelled by the fleet in the review period was more than 550,000 with approximately 221,000 liters of fuel consumed. Average fleet fuel consumption during the review period was higher than peer fleet averages at 40.9 l/100 km for all vehicle categories. Fuel usage for Class 7 trucks was the highest at 100.9 l/100 km. Utilization, measured by kilometers 6, was lower than peer fleet average for all categories, with fleet wide utilization for Aurora being 8,421 compared to peer fleet average of 14,889. Note: Vehicle utilization, as measured by kilometers-driven is not presented by RSI-FC as being a relevant measure of performance for a municipal fleet. A more relevant measure would be one that is tied to productivity but to our knowledge no such indicators exist. As so, and in the absence of any other known form of industry benchmarking measures, we present the KMs-driven data point for information purpose only. Current Aurora Planned Lifecycles The current life cycles for each vehicle category are listed in Table 2: Current Vehicle Life Cycle Practices (below). Table 2: Aurora Current Vehicle Life Cycle Practices Vehicle Category Current Planned Life Cycle Cars 8 years Pickups 8 years Vans 8 years Light Duty Trucks (Class 3) 8 years Medium Duty Trucks (Class 4-6) 8 years Heavy Duty Trucks (Class 7 & 8) 8 years … 6 Note: Utilization by average kilometers-travelled for peer fleets as shown in Table 1 represents data for numerous Canadian fleets and should be treated as a relative measure. Regional, vocational, geographical, fleet vehicle mix and climatic conditions must all be considered before making assessments or comparisons. T General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, February 18, 2020 Item R1 Page 64 of 86 THE TOWN OF AURORA LIFE CYCLE ANALYSIS AND LONG TERM CAPITAL PLAN - 10 - 3.0 LCA Methodology ife cycle analysis (LCA) enables determining the best time to replace vehicles and equipment in terms of age, mileage or other pertinent factors. In Figure 2: Life Cycle Analysis Example (below), the concept of life cycle cost is demonstrated. Figure 2: Life Cycle Analysis Example As shown in Figure 2 (above), as the age of a vehicle at retirement increases, ownership costs decline and operating costs increase. In this example, operating cost includes maintenance, loss of driver productivity caused by reduced vehicle reliability and the impact of increased fuel consumption by delaying the purchase of a new vehicle. The sum of these costs represents the “Life Cycle Cost Curve”. The ideal time to replace vehicles is before the rise in operating costs begins to outweigh the decline in ownership costs. The Life Cycle Cost Curve The “Life Cycle Cost Curve” and the ideal replacement cycle will be different for various types of vehicles and possibly even individual vehicles of the same type. This variability can be caused by differences in the vehicle make, model year, equipment design, operating environment or even by how the operator uses the vehicle. Recommended replacement cycles for a class of vehicles is thus an approximation of the optimal time to replace most units within that class. L General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, February 18, 2020 Item R1 Page 65 of 86 THE TOWN OF AURORA LIFE CYCLE ANALYSIS AND LONG TERM CAPITAL PLAN - 11 - Replacement cycles should be considered as a guideline only, as some vehicles that are in poor or unsafe condition may require replacement before the criteria is met, and conversely, some vehicles that exceed the criteria may be in good condition and may not warrant replacement. Fleet managers need to exercise judgment and fleet management principles in either advancing replacement or delaying replacement for individual vehicles case by case. Life cycles for vehicles are determined by modeling the expected cash flows for owning and operating the vehicle. The approach involves forecasting a stream of costs over a study horizon (future period) for each type of vehicle and determining the replacement cycle that results in the lowest total cost of ownership. For the Town of Aurora, discounted cash flow analysis was completed for each vehicle class to complete the LCA. Net Present Value (NPV) was calculated for outgoing cash flows (vehicle purchase cost, maintenance cost, the impact of downtime on driver productivity cost, improved fuel efficiency of new vehicle compared to the old vehicle) and incoming cash flows (vehicle residual value) to calculate the total life cycle cost for various vehicle retention periods. The NPV amounts for cash flows were converted to Annual Equivalent Cost (AEC) to provide a dollar amount which is easy to relate to, and compare alternative life cycle costs. AEC is the fixed annual payment that that would be required to pay back the cumulative capital and operating costs over the study period. The AEC can be viewed as an average annual cost that considers the time value of money for future cash flows. Key Parameters and Assumptions Section 4 of this report provides the results of the LCA analysis for each vehicle class, assumptions made and recommendations. The key LCA parameters used for all vehicle classes are listed in Table 3: Key LCA Parameters and Assumptions (below). Table 3: Key LCA Parameters and Assumptions Parameter Value Description Net Acquisition Cost: Varies by vehicle class Average vehicle acquisition cost provided by the Town of Aurora Cost of Capital/Lease Rate 3.95% Cost of funds for vehicle acquisition (prime interest rate at the time the LCA) Discount Rate for NPV 1.75% Rate used to discount cash flows Sales Tax Rate % 0% HST assumed to be zero as a pass-through Tech Prod Loss Hrs./Touch 2.5 Average loss in driver productivity each time a vehicle is serviced by a mechanic. Work orders were deemed to be equivalent to “touches”. General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, February 18, 2020 Item R1 Page 66 of 86 THE TOWN OF AURORA LIFE CYCLE ANALYSIS AND LONG TERM CAPITAL PLAN - 12 - Tech. Labour Rate $/Hr. $41 Hourly labour rate provided by the Town of Aurora. Note: lead mechanic rate is $44.00 CIF7 on Maintenance 1% Cost increase factor or inflation on parts and mechanic labor CIF on Driver Rate 2% Cost increase factor or inflation on driver loaded labor rate CIF on Vehicle 1% Cost increase factor or inflation on vehicle replacement prices. CIF on Fuel 4% Assumption based on market trends Annual Vehicle Efficiency Improvement 2% Fuel efficiency improvement factor for new vehicles compared to the vehicles being replaced (estimated by Fleet Challenge). Average Km/Yr. Varies by vehicle class Annual distance travelled. Assumption that the new vehicle will travel the same distance as the old vehicle. Cash Flow Horizon (yrs.) Varies by vehicle class The discounted cash flow study period. The period was adjusted based on vehicle class (up to 20 years) and years of data that was available. … 7 CIF = Cost Inflation Factor General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, February 18, 2020 Item R1 Page 67 of 86 THE TOWN OF AURORA LIFE CYCLE ANALYSIS AND LONG TERM CAPITAL PLAN - 13 - FAR Software and Long-Term Capital Planning The FAR software tool complements Life Cycle Analysis (LCA) and calculates five-year (or longer) fleet capital replacement plans with the objective of balancing go-forward budgets and in doing so, avoiding year to year cost spikes. The tool calculates and displays whether replacing vehicles due for replacement would save the organization money or cost additional money – on a unit by unit basis. It also calculates and displays the GHG reduction impacts of vehicle replacements unit by unit, and for the whole fleet. The Long-Term Capital Planning tool (LTCP) is a tool that empowers fleet managers to make the ultimate, logic-based, well-informed business decisions to either: “replace”, or “defer to next year” units due for replacement. The tool calculates and displays the cost and GHG impacts of those decisions. Using Long-Term Capital Planning tool, a capital budget is automatically prepared for the next five years. This enables fleet managers to smooth any year-over-year cost spikes, keeping the average age of the fleet to an acceptable level that provides the lowest cost and emissions, and the highest uptime. Vehicle data is input into the Long-Term Capital Planning tool from the fleet’s baseline data. The tool (sample screen shown in Figure 3: FAR Dashboard (below) then calculates capital budgets for the ensuing five years, which are displayed, based on the fleet manager’s vehicle retention practices. A capital budget is then automatically calculated for each year of the ensuing five-year period. Figure 3: FAR Dashboard Vehicle Replacement Criteria General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, February 18, 2020 Item R1 Page 68 of 86 THE TOWN OF AURORA LIFE CYCLE ANALYSIS AND LONG TERM CAPITAL PLAN - 14 - The life cycle analysis completed in this report optimizes vehicle life cycle cost based on vehicle age. Vehicle age was determined to be the best replacement criteria for the Town of Aurora, given the geographic footprint of the operating territory and since most vehicles will time-out versus mileage-out at retirement. For higher annual mileage vehicles in the fleet, it is recommended that the Town of Aurora review the condition of high mileage vehicles at thresholds of 20,000 km/yr. for light-duty vehicles and 25,000 km/yr. for medium and heavy-duty vehicles for potential early replacement. This should take place on a case-by-case basis as vehicles approach these thresholds. The recommended vehicle replacement age was multiplied by these values for mileage thresholds. For example, if the recommended life cycle is 10 years for a vehicle type, the recommended replacement mileage is 10 x 20,000 = 140,000 km. It is noteworthy that most Aurora vehicles do not travel these annual distances but that reality could change if for example, the fleet began to be utilized more fully. Life Cycle Analysis Life Cycle Analysis (LCA) illustrates the total life cycle cost of fleet vehicle types/categories. LCA can help determine: x What age units should be considered for replacement ͒ x When replacement should occur (ideally before costs rise and reliability/safety reduced, ͒and before major capital expenditure or refurbishment is necessary) ͒ As LCA identifies capital strategies that will optimize vehicle life cycles and return on investment, it should be the first step in long-term capital budget planning. ͒季 Approach: Using Fleet Analytics Review™ (FAR) baseline data, an LCA model was completed for each of the Town of Aurora’s primary vehicle categories. From data provided to RSI-FC by Aurora, LCA was compiled for vehicles up to 20 model years of age if data was available. For the analysis, our team used two proprietary RSI LCA modelling tools. The first, our primary tool for LCA modeling, was developed by RSI-FC in 2013 and a refresh completed in 2017. This tool is dependent on actual fleet historical data when available for the model years and vehicle types being studied. In the absence of actual data, as a workaround for Aurora, RSI-FC backfilled gaps with municipal peer group fleet average data from our Canadian municipal database. The tool accounts for all relevant metrics around cost of vehicle ownership plus adds an inflation factor to each year of the LCA study horizon. The second LCA modeling tool we employed for Aurora is a reliable and effective LCA tool based on user inputs for each year of the study. As so, this tool delivers a hypothetical perspective since it does not depend on actual historical data, and instead depends on the industry-estimates of costs and timelines. Despite having limitations, in that it depends on the knowledge on an experienced user and industry General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, February 18, 2020 Item R1 Page 69 of 86 THE TOWN OF AURORA LIFE CYCLE ANALYSIS AND LONG TERM CAPITAL PLAN - 15 - estimates, it is an excellent way to cross-check, confirm and validate the results of LCA tool number one (the RSI-FC primary LCA tool). In some categories, given that cost data was unavailable for Aurora’s fleet and no comparable data existed in our peer fleet database, LCA was impossible. By means of the two LCA tools we’ve described, and given data shortcomings, analysis was successfully completed for these Aurora vehicle categories: x Pickup Trucks x Vans x Class 3 Trucks x Medium Duty Trucks - Class 4-5 x Heavy Duty Trucks - Class 7-8 … General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, February 18, 2020 Item R1 Page 70 of 86 THE TOWN OF AURORA LIFE CYCLE ANALYSIS AND LONG TERM CAPITAL PLAN - 16 - 4.0 Life Cycle Analysis Results ife Cycle Analysis (LCA) was calculated for each category of vehicles in the fleet where data was available. The LCA findings and recommended tactics presented are based on actual historical data compiled by units and by ages for the review period, and confirmed by a second LCA model as described in Section 3 of this report. The LCA took into consideration the cost of downtime (as caused by reduced reliability). LCA also considered the year-to-year “roll-up” of WACC, inflation, worker cost/hour, salvage and market values, inflation, and average kilometers-driven data. The results are summarized in Table 4 Life Cycle Analysis Results Summary, (below). Supporting information for each LCA result is provided in the appendices. Where recommendations are made to consider extending lifecycles we suggest a cautious approach. Vehicles approaching end of life should be assessed case by case – a thorough ground-up and top-down physical assessment of vehicle condition, perhaps in conjunction with a routine shop visit for a PM inspection would serve to inform decisions around extending vehicle life cycles. RSI-FC will provide our LCA tool to Aurora for its own use post-project and we encourage the company to continue using this tool to re-visit vehicle life cycles as data becomes available. L General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, February 18, 2020 Item R1 Page 71 of 86 THE TOWN OF AURORA LIFE CYCLE ANALYSIS AND LONG TERM CAPITAL PLAN - 17 - Table 4: Life Cycle Analysis Results Summary Category Optimized Life Cycles (Proposed) Recommended Change (+ or -) Notes Kilometers Years Pickups * Up to 220,000 9-11 +1 to + 3 yrs. Consider extending* life cycles by 1 to 3 years longer than the present practice. x LCA model 1 (actual data) calculates optimal lifecycle is 11 years x LCA model 2 (hypothetical) estimates optimal age is 9 yrs. and forecasts a large cost spike in Y10. * Each unit should be assessed case by case starting in year 9 based on condition and accumulated kilometers. Vans * 200,000 + 10 + 2 yrs. Consider extending* life cycles by 2 years. x LCA models 1 (actual data) and 2 (hypothetical) in agreement * Model 2 suggests assessing each unit case by case starting in year 8 based on accumulated kilometers and vehicle condition. General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, February 18, 2020 Item R1 Page 72 of 86 THE TOWN OF AURORA LIFE CYCLE ANALYSIS AND LONG TERM CAPITAL PLAN - 18 - Class 3 Trucks *250,000 – 275,000 10-11 + 2 to + 3 yrs. Consider extending* lifecycle by 2 to 3 years. x LCA model 1 (actual data) forecasts 10 years is optimal (based on cost rollup). x LCA model 2 (hypothetical) forecasts 11 years is optimal (with a large cost spike in Y12) Recommend re-running the LCA when data is available. * Assess each unit case by case starting in Y10 based on accumulated kilometers and vehicle condition. Class 4-5 Trucks *200,000 - 275,000 9-11 +1 to + 3 yrs. x LCA model 1 (actual data) calculates extending* lifecycle to 9 years is optimal - with minimal/nil negative cost impacts to Y12 x LCA model 2 (hypothetical) forecasts extending* the life to 11 years is viable LCA indicates replacement by Y9 years is optimal but should be confirmed case by case through physical condition evaluation. Recommend re-running the LCA when actual data is available. * Assess case by case starting in year 8 based on accumulated kilometers and unit condition General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, February 18, 2020 Item R1 Page 73 of 86 THE TOWN OF AURORA LIFE CYCLE ANALYSIS AND LONG TERM CAPITAL PLAN - 19 - Class 7-8 Trucks *275,000 – 300,000 11-12 + 3 to + 4 yrs. x LCA model 1 (actual data) calculates extending* lifecycle to 12 years delivers lowest lifecycle cost x LCA model 2 (hypothetical) predicts 11 years is optimal with a large cost spike in Y12 Recommend re-running the LCA models when data is available. * Assess case by case starting in year 11 based on accumulated kilometers and unit condition General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, February 18, 2020 Item R1 Page 74 of 86 THE TOWN OF AURORA LIFE CYCLE ANALYSIS AND LONG TERM CAPITAL PLAN - 20 - 5.0 LCA and Long-Term Capital Planning ith the optimal lifecycles calculated for Aurora based on historical operating data, by means of its LCA, RSI-FC then employed its Fleet Analytics Review™ (FAR) software to prepare baseline analysis plus three long-term Capex planning scenarios to demonstrate the impacts of capital planning. These are: Baseline Analysis: The FAR software tool was used to plot Aurora’s current-day baseline relative to the fleet’s age and operating statistics in a one-year review period. This baseline included data on service levels (uptime and utilization), operating costs, fuel consumption and GHG emissions. Scenario 1 - Business as Usual: FAR modeling was then used to forecast go-forward outcomes based on Aurora’s present-day (8-year) vehicle replacement practices. These business-as-usual (BAU) outcomes included the impacts of current-day vehicle replacement cycles on operating expenses (increase/decrease), vehicle replacement capital requirements in a five-year horizon, GHG reduction, and service levels. Based on current-day replacement practices, it was determined that 32 units are currently either due or past-due for replacement. To replace all 32 would require $2,087,563 (net, based on estimated new replacement vehicle cost minus residual market value remaining in existing units). If all 32 units were replaced, an annual operating expense reduction of $46,271 was forecasted (once all units were in service). Scenario 2 – LCA Optimized Vehicle Replacements: With LCA-optimized vehicle lifecycles calculated, RSI-FC then completed two new FAR scenarios. These scenarios calculated the operating expenses (increase/decrease), and vehicle replacement capital requirements (in a five-year horizon), GHG reduction, and service levels, for both (1) the minimum optimal economic lifecycles and (2) maximum vehicle ages as determined by LCA. Based on optimized LCA modeling, Capex of $1,519,182 would be required based on minimum LCA replacement cycles. Capex of $1,334,534 would be required to extend lifecycles to the maximum LCA- optimized economic replacement cycles. Operating expense reductions were determined to be $47,193 and $47,721 respectively for the two scenarios. Scenario 3 - Return on Investment: FAR was next used to determine potential, and actual, return on investment (ROI) for each fleet vehicle due/overdue for replacement. This determination was made by comparing the cost of a similar one-year older vehicles (using model-year and vehicle type data from RSI-FC’s peer fleet database) to the operating costs of new, replacement vehicles. For this scenario, to reduce the overall capital spend in one fiscal year, any units that did not show a reasonable amount of positive ROI were deferred by our analysts to the following year. W General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, February 18, 2020 Item R1 Page 75 of 86 THE TOWN OF AURORA LIFE CYCLE ANALYSIS AND LONG TERM CAPITAL PLAN - 21 - By selectively and strategically deferring the purchase of nine units to a later year based on low level of ROI, the capital budget requirement was reduced to $667,451 in year one of the five-year capital plan. With this reduced level of Capex, by deferring units that showed little or no ROI if replaced, an Opex reduction of $48,436 was determined to be possible. Please see the dialogue box below for an important note about Scenario 3. Important note regarding Scenario 3: Scenario 3 (above) was prepared for demonstration purposes only. RSI-FC analysts prepared this scenario without any degree of knowledge regarding the mechanical condition of Aurora’s vehicles. In preparing Scenario 3 in FAR, our analyst deferred replacement of all vehicles where a positive business case for replacement did not exist. Therefore, the amount of capital required for vehicle replacement in Scenario 3 is reflective of all vehicles due (or past-due) for replacement for which the investment in replacement vehicles was determined to potentially provide ROI on the capital expenditure. LCA is not a guarantee of performance. It is only an averaging of operational costs by model year for groups of like vehicles within a fleet, to enable fleet managers to assess average annual economic costs by vehicle age. Within a fleet, some vehicles may have had lighter usage than average; other units may have recently been refurbished – either of these situations may enable extending life cycles beyond the optimal life calculated by LCA. For this reason, we recommend that long-term vehicle replacement planning should be a two- step process. It should begin with determining an initial list of units due/past-due for replacement via LCA-optimized life cycles. Then, the actual condition of each vehicle due for replacement should be assessed case-by-case by fleet personnel who are knowledgeable and familiar with the condition of each unit. This process may allow safely extending vehicle lifecycles by deferring replacement of some units to ensuing years, thereby enabling the balancing of long-term capital plans. General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, February 18, 2020 Item R1 Page 76 of 86 THE TOWN OF AURORA LIFE CYCLE ANALYSIS AND LONG TERM CAPITAL PLAN - 22 - Summary of Scenarios 1-3 As discussed in this section of our report, capital spending and the resultant operating expense impacts vary when the current-day baseline period and the three capital planning approaches are compared. All vehicle replacement scenarios that were studied were determined to deliver significant operating expense reductions, confirming that a newer fleet is less costly to operate. The high-level impacts of the scenarios are shown in Table 5: Capex Impacts on Opex Reduction (below). As shown, by selectively reducing Capex spending through LCA and ROI analysis, operating expense reductions are also achievable. Table 5: Capex Impacts on Opex Reduction General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, February 18, 2020 Item R1 Page 77 of 86 THE TOWN OF AURORA LIFE CYCLE ANALYSIS AND LONG TERM CAPITAL PLAN - 23 - LCA Data Modelling Overview The impacts of the three scenarios over baseline are shown in Figure 4: Summary of Group 1 Capex Impacts on Operating Expenses (below). Capex requirements for 2019 are significantly higher because of the many (32) units that are due or past-due for replacement and the current 8-year replacement cycle practice. Figure 4: Summary of Capex Impacts on Operating Expenses Capital Strategy 2019 Capex 2020 Capex 2021 Capex 2022 Capex 2023 Capex Current Vehicle Replacement Practices (8 yrs.) $2,087,563 $423,897 $288,625 $344,950 $136,899 LCA Optimized, W/Min. Age $1,519,182 $273,099 $444,381 $582,946 $207,804 LCA Optimized, W/Max. Age $1,334,534 $212,594 $378,224 $459,093 $346,110 LCA Optimized, W/Max. Age & ROI $667,451 $321,308 $378,224 $399,482 $346,110 In Table 6: Effects of LCA on Multi Year Capex (below), the data presented in Figure 4 is depicted. After an initial “catch-up” period of Capex spending that is recommended, Scenario 3 (LCA Optimized, W/Max. Age & ROI) delivers a balanced approach to long-term capital spending along with a potential for significant operating expense reductions. General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, February 18, 2020 Item R1 Page 78 of 86 THE TOWN OF AURORA LIFE CYCLE ANALYSIS AND LONG TERM CAPITAL PLAN - 24 - As shown in Table 6: Effects of LCA on Multi Year Capex (above), Scenario 1 is not our recommended vehicle replacement strategy for several reasons including that it would be an unbalanced approach to long-term capital budget planning since a massive “spike” would occur in the first capital budget year to replace all 32 due/past due units, followed by a significant drop in Capex, which then plateaus in ensuing years (the “saw tooth” effect). It may also mean that value could be lost by replacing some units with remaining service life. RSI-FC suggests that the appropriate level of capital spending lies between the second and third scenarios. It can be determined through combining LCA analysis recommendations, followed by unit-by- unit vehicle condition assessments for all vehicles due for replacement, to determine if lifecycles can be extended. The process should begin by determining an initial list of units due/past-due for replacement via LCA- optimized life cycles (as we have done in FAR). The actual condition of each vehicle due for replacement should then be assessed case-by-case, by fleet personnel who are knowledgeable and familiar with the condition of each unit. This process will allow safely extending vehicle lifecycles by deferring replacement of some units to ensuing years, thereby enabling the balancing of capital plans. Table 6: Effects of LCA on Long-Term Budgets General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, February 18, 2020 Item R1 Page 79 of 86 THE TOWN OF AURORA LIFE CYCLE ANALYSIS AND LONG TERM CAPITAL PLAN - 25 - While historical data in LTCP will demonstrate whether a business case exists for vehicle replacement, the final step in long term capital planning depends on the expertise of the organization’s fleet management personnel. No software tool can supplant this key role in capital budget planning. Typically, when a fleet manager uses LTCP for the first time, year one will show a cost spike caused by previously deferred vehicles. Some of these units can be again deferred because they are still in good serviceable condition, have low mileage, or perhaps have just received a costly refurbishment that will extend the unit’s life. Other vehicles may no longer have a purpose in the organization and can be eliminated altogether. For these reasons, each vehicle that is shown as due for replacement in the LTCP should be reviewed one-by- one and decisions made whether to extend the unit’s life by one (or more) years or eliminate it from the fleet altogether – these decisions are aided by the LTCP tool by displaying to the user whether a cost savings is possible by replacing it. Downtime and Fleet Reliability Aging fleets almost always have decreased reliability and high levels of costly downtime, higher repair costs, decreased safety, poor fuel economy and the resultant increased costs of fuel because of old technology vehicles. There are additional benefits of a newer, more fuel-efficient fleet and these include increased vehicle uptime; a lower risk level and quite possibly, improved employee morale as well. Downtime costs increase exponentially when more than one person is dependent on a single vehicle to complete their work routines. Adding to the total cost associated with less reliable, aging vehicles and downtime is the additional expense of owning, maintaining, licensing, insuring and parking spare, back- up vehicles. When a fleet is more modern and reliable, fleet size is generally reduced in numbers since less spares are necessary. Providing capital to refresh the fleet each year with new vehicles is essential in any business that relies on the fleet to provide its core services to customers. A good guideline for fleet replacement is to invest capital at the rate of depreciation. For example, if vehicles are depreciated over five years, then 20% of NPV would be required each year to maintain the average age of the fleet at the desirable level. However, this guideline is only valid if performance indicators such as uptime and fuel-efficiency are satisfactory – if not, then a one-time increased spend would help to bring the fleet’s average age, and performance up to an acceptable level. Synopsis s we’ve demonstrated in the previous sections of this report, capital and operating expense impacts vary using the three long-term capital planning approaches we prepared. Each scenario reduces the forecasted total controllable operating expenses, demonstrating the positive financial benefits of fleet modernization. A General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, February 18, 2020 Item R1 Page 80 of 86 THE TOWN OF AURORA LIFE CYCLE ANALYSIS AND LONG TERM CAPITAL PLAN - 26 - Conclusion his concludes our LCA and Long-Term Capital Planning report for the Town of Aurora. Highlights of the detailed life cycle analyses are shown in the appendices. LCA worksheets for all vehicle categories are provided separately. … Richmond Sustainability Initiatives – Fleet Challenge Canada: 416 418 9931 www.richmondsustainability.org or www.e3fleet.com or www.fleetchallenge.ca Lead Analyst and Author: Roger Smith Contributors: Jana Cervinka, John Lyon, Chris Hill, Melissa Felder Data Support and Analysis: Hugh Robert T General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, February 18, 2020 Item R1 Page 81 of 86 THE TOWN OF AURORA, LIFE CYCLE ANALYSIS AND LONG TERM CAPITAL PLAN Appendix “A” – LCA for Pickups LCA Model One (actual data) LCA Model Two (hypothetical) General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, February 18, 2020 Item R1 Page 82 of 86 THE TOWN OF AURORA, LIFE CYCLE ANALYSIS AND LONG TERM CAPITAL PLAN Appendix “B” – LCA for Vans LCA Model One (actual data) LCA Model Two (hypothetical) General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, February 18, 2020 Item R1 Page 83 of 86 THE TOWN OF AURORA, LIFE CYCLE ANALYSIS AND LONG TERM CAPITAL PLAN Appendix “C” – LCA for Class 3 Trucks LCA Model One (actual data) LCA Model Two (hypothetical) General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, February 18, 2020 Item R1 Page 84 of 86 THE TOWN OF AURORA, LIFE CYCLE ANALYSIS AND LONG TERM CAPITAL PLAN Appendix “D” – LCA for Class 4-5 Trucks LCA Model One (actual data) LCA Model Two (hypothetical) General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, February 18, 2020 Item R1 Page 85 of 86 THE TOWN OF AURORA, LIFE CYCLE ANALYSIS AND LONG TERM CAPITAL PLAN Appendix “E” – LCA for Class 7-8 Trucks LCA Model One (actual data) LCA Model Two (hypothetical) General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, February 18, 2020 Item R1 Page 86 of 86 Town of Aurora General Committee Report No. FIN20-006 Subject: Transition to Prudent Investor Regime Prepared by: Laura Sheardown, Financial Management Advisor Department: Finance Date: February 18, 2020 Recommendation 1. That Report No. FIN20-006 be received; and 2. That the proposed Investment Policy Statement, attached as Appendix 1 be approved; and 3. That the Director of Finance – Treasurer be authorized to execute the ONE Joint Investment Board Agreement, subject to the final form and content of the agreement being to the satisfaction of the Director of Finance – Treasurer, the Town Solicitor; and 4. That the Director of Finance – Treasurer be authorized to execute an Initial Formation Agreement with the other Founding Member Municipalities to establish a joint investment board, subject to the final form and content of the Initial Formation Agreement being to the satisfaction of the Director of Finance – Treasurer and the Town Solicitor; and 5. That a By-law be enacted to authorize a joint investment board to manage the Town’s long-term investments under the Prudent Investment; and 6. That after the ONE Joint Investment Board Agreement has been executed by ONE Joint Investment Board and all of the Founding Member Municipalities, a by-law be enacted to authorize the Town’s investments under the Prudent Investment regime. Executive Summary With the municipal investment structure recently being broadened, staff have explored the potential investment structures that are now available to the Town. Based upon its findings, staff have concluded that it would be advantageous for the Town to pursue the General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, February 18, 2020 Item R2 Page 1 of 37 February 18, 2020 Page 2 of 11 Report No. FIN20-006 adoption of a prudent investor regime for its long-term investments. In order for the Town to proceed with a transition from a legal list to the Prudent Investor regime for its longer term investments, Council’s approval is required. This report offers further explanations to Council in support of their decision. • There are several benefits of investing under a Prudent Investor regime • Joining the Prudent Investor JIB provides more investment options than the Legal List and expands upon the Town’s existing relationship with the ONE Fund • As a member of the ONE JIB, the Town would firstly adopt a more conservative approach to its investments until such time a more strategic reserve management plan is developed as part of the 2021 Capital Budget Process • Comparison of administration costs for legal list, ONE Fund and the Proposed ONE JIB Investment Background Investing under the Municipal Act, 2001 and O. Reg 438/97 is divided into the prescribed list of securities which is more commonly referred to as the Legal List and the Prudent Investor regime. The Prudent Investor regime gives the municipality access to a wider variety of investments, but also includes a new governance model. The most cost effective manner through which the Town is able access the Prudent Investor regime is through a Joint Investment Board (JIB) as establishing its own Investment Board is not financially feasible. There are currently no joint investment boards in place in Ontario; however, Local Authority Services (LAS) is in the process of establishing the province’s first JIB. Presently the LAS offers municipalities access to the equity component of the legal list of eligible investments through its one of a kind ONE Fund into which the Town currently has five percent of its total portfolio invested. The Town of Aurora has been invited to join LAS’ ONE JIB as a founding member. In order to become a member of a JIB, a municipality is required to relinquish its control and management of any funds that it does not require immediately to the JIB who will invest on behalf of the municipality subject to the municipality’s Investment Policy Statement and the overarching portfolio’s investment plan. Funds that are defined as being needed immediately by the Town of Aurora continue to follow the investing rules and limitations outlined through the Legal List. On November 19, 2019, Council reviewed the benefits of the new Prudent Investor (PI) regime – FS19-033 Prudent Investor Option Analysis and directed staff to proceed with an in-depth review of the investment options and revised investment policy with FAC. General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, February 18, 2020 Item R2 Page 2 of 37 February 18, 2020 Page 3 of 11 Report No. FIN20-006 On January 28, 2020, FAC completed their review of the Prudent Investor regime and directed staff to proceed to General Committee for their final approval of the Town transitioning to the Prudent Investor regime as a founding member. Currently there are eight municipalities, outlined in table 1 below, that are actively moving forward together as founding members of the ONE JIB. In order to create the ONE JIB a minimum of two municipalities is required, with a combined total of at least $100 million in monies not required immediately that are available for investment through the JIB. Each JIB municipal member must also have their Councils adopt an IPS and enter into all of the necessary membership agreements. Presently, the Town of Bracebridge has received Council direction to move forward with the formation of the JIB and is awaiting the others to reach a similar stage. Huntsville and Muskoka expect to achieve equivalent milestones this month. The City of Kenora and the Towns of Whitby and Innisfil expect Council approval in March. Table 1 Founding member estimated initial investment Municipality Money and Investments Not Required Immediately (Millions) Town of Aurora 35 Town of Innisfil 15 City of Kenora 50 District of Muskoka < 100 Town of Whitby 100 Town of Bracebridge 4 Town of Huntsville < 15 Essex County < 85 Total ~ 439 Analysis There are several benefits of investing under a Prudent Investor regime The Prudent Investor regime expands municipal investment opportunities, which may enable better risk-adjusted returns. A risk adjusted return reflects the prudent balancing of investment risk with returns. The restrictions placed on Legal List investing can embed concentration risk into a municipality’s investment portfolio. For example, legal list portfolios may be heavily invested in bonds which have a tendency to follow yield General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, February 18, 2020 Item R2 Page 3 of 37 February 18, 2020 Page 4 of 11 Report No. FIN20-006 trends opposite to those of equity; consequently, if equity investments are performing well, bond returns are low and vice versa. As a result, municipalities are only able to access stronger investment returns when equity is weakening; however, they are unable to access the historical much higher returns from equity when their bond returns are weakening over the same time period. The diversification of available investment products and the removal of geographic limitations, which are only available under the Prudent Investor regime may mitigate this noted concentration risk. Risk Adjusted Returns For municipalities, as stewards of public funds preservation of capital is a key priority that needs to be balanced with the need for returns. Municipal budgets are under tremendous pressure to maximize revenues while minimizing the need for property tax increases. As municipalities seek to diversify revenues to put less pressure on property taxes, investment revenue becomes more important as an underused alternative revenue stream. Diversification The Prudent Investor regime will enable the Town to invest in a broader array of investment products facilitating the building of a more diversified investment portfolio. This concept of diversification is one of the basic principles used to reduce overall portfolio risk. Geographical Diversification The Prudent Investor regime would allow the Town to invest in the Global markets. Securities prices in equities and fixed income markets outside of Canada will be influenced by a different set of factors than apply to Canadian securities. Typically, different economic fundamentals and political circumstances drive returns from investments outside of Canada. For this reason, the pattern of returns from Global stocks and fixed income will be differentiated in comparison to returns for Canadian securities, which provides a basis of diversification benefits, which in turn tend to reduce overall portfolio risk. Under the current Legal List, the Town can only buy Canadian equities (which are only available through ONE Investment) which exposes municipalities to the risk of a downturn in the Canadian market. General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, February 18, 2020 Item R2 Page 4 of 37 February 18, 2020 Page 5 of 11 Report No. FIN20-006 Joining the Prudent Investor JIB provides more investment options than the Legal List and expands upon the Town’s existing relationship with the ONE Fund Under the Legal List the Town currently invests five percent of its investment portfolio through the ONE Equity Fund. As a member of a JIB, the Town will have access to a much wider variety of investment options. The ONE JIB’s portfolio’s investment holdings will be diverse, including traditional legal list investments; as well as holdings from both the Global Equity and Global Bond markets which otherwise would not be accessible to the municipality outside of a PI regime. Table 2 below compares the Town of Aurora’s actual returns on long-term investments, the actual returns earned on the equity portion of its portfolio with ONE Fund under the Legal List and what the Town’s returns could have been under the Prudent Investor regime using our acceptable level of risk. The hypothetical PI returns are based upon a recommended asset mix of 26.6 percent equity and 73.4 percent bonds for the Town of Aurora based upon its identified investment risk tolerance. Table 2 Comparison of Long-term Rates of Return (%) 2018 2017 2016 2015 2014 2013 Compound Annual Average Town of Aurora – actual investment returns for all long-term investments 2.9 2.7 3.2 3.5 4.6 5.6 3.7 Town of Aurora – actual investment returns for ONE Equity Fund only* (3.4) 9.3 14.9 n/a n/a n/a 6.9 Hypothetical PI returns 0.6 6.9 3.6 9.2 10.5 12.3 7.1 * Represents approximately five percent of Aurora’s total portfolio. The Town’s investment in this fund commenced in 2016. ONE Investment has used proxies to assemble the above analysis. All back test data is based on hypothetical scenarios and is not based on actual investment returns achieved by investors. These details are provided for discussion purposes only, readers should use caution in extrapolating future returns from this analysis. General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, February 18, 2020 Item R2 Page 5 of 37 February 18, 2020 Page 6 of 11 Report No. FIN20-006 The details in Table 2 demonstrate that an increased allocation to equities and adding global exposure tends to improve investment returns over the long run while diversification helps mitigate potential losses. Since many of the longer term investments will be used for repair and replacement capital projects in the future, higher investment returns on the Town’s reserves will mean less funds will be required from future taxes or user rates. As a member of the ONE JIB, the Town would firstly adopt a more conservative approach to its investments until such time a more strategic reserve management plan is developed as part of the 2021 Capital Budget Process In the development of the overall JIB’s investment portfolio investment plan, it will consider each individual municipal member’s investment policy statement and questionnaire. These two documents outline each municipality’s investment risk tolerance, the details of the types of funds that they plan to invest with the JIB and when those funds will be required. Based upon this input, the JIB defines its desired mix of investments for its portfolio, including how long each investment is expected to be held. Funds invested over a longer term, such as ten years, will have a higher mix of equity as they will have time to recover from short-term losses whereas funds needed within the next two to three years will have a lower level of equity as short term losses cannot be managed in this time frame. The Town plans to develop a more sophisticated capital plan as part of the 2021 Budget. The changes to the capital plan will provide a better understanding of expected capital cash flows over the next ten years along with a more strategic reserve management plan. These two elements will provide the Town with better estimates of when the reserve funds are required in the future and will better inform the acceptable level of risk that the Town can manage for its longer term investment portfolio. Until this work is complete staff recommend proceeding with a more conservative shorter-term approach where the investment principal is more protected. Comparison of administration costs for legal list, ONE Fund and the Proposed ONE JIB Investments Legal List Investments Although the Town does not pay separate management fees, the Investment Brokers through which the Town accesses its legal list investments receive their compensation through the difference between the wholesale rates offered by the banks and credit unions and the institutional rates that are offered to the Town by the investment brokers. General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, February 18, 2020 Item R2 Page 6 of 37 February 18, 2020 Page 7 of 11 Report No. FIN20-006 Please note that although investment firms are required to disclose all fees paid to them for retail clients, it is not a requirement for institutional clients, such as the Town. ONE Fund The existing ONE Fund charges its administration costs based upon the value of assets that it is responsible for managing. ONE Joint Investment Board The ONE JIB is not yet operational and therefore these numbers are just estimates. Table 3 below presents the projected cost estimates for a full year of JIB operations. All costs directly attributed to the Prudent Investor regime and the ONE JIB have been included under the ONE JIB costs line. The included administrative fees represent a 50 percent share of the total estimated shared administrative costs between the ONE JIB and ONE Investment funds program. The estimated administrative fees include custody1, accounting, legal, PI pooled fund audits, investment advisory staff, OSC compliance reporting etc. External manager fees are not included as ONE Investment has no control over these costs. Table 3 Projected Annual Expenses for ONE JIB Projected expense 2021 ONE JIB (Includes integrity commissioner, closed meeting, investigator, JIB member remuneration, open meeting costs, etc.) $454,600 Administrative fees $676,350 Total* $1,130,950 * does not include external manager fees which ONE investment does not control. The costs outlined above are similar to the annual budget for the City of Toronto Investment Board, which anecdotally are approximately $1M/year. As assets under management (AUM), or total dollars invested, grow these largely fixed costs are spread over a larger asset base (i.e. As more municipalities and more assets move into the 1 It is important to note that most investment management companies charge custody costs over and above fund manager fees and administrative fees. ONE Investment believes in an “all-in” approach for fees. General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, February 18, 2020 Item R2 Page 7 of 37 February 18, 2020 Page 8 of 11 Report No. FIN20-006 prudent investor portfolio, these costs become more distributed leading to lower costs per dollar invested for each individual investor). Additionally, ONE Investment fees cover: • Professional Fund Management • Professional Investment Advice • Diversification • Investment Flexibility & Liquidity • Performance Reporting • Investment Oversight • Regulatory Compliance Guarantee • Municipal-specific Investment Approach To maintain its not-for-profit status, ONE Investment fees will be reviewed annually. For ongoing transparency ONE Investment will publish annual audited financial statements on its website which will provide details of the organization’s costs of operation. A summary of the estimated administrative costs for each of these modes of investment are presented below. Table 4 Estimated investment administrative costs Broker/Investment Fund Basis Points Charged Legal List - Other Town Investment Brokers (charged on rate of return) 3-15 ONE Fund (charged on assets under management) Money Market Portfolio 19 Bond Portfolio 40 Universe Corporate Bond 45 Equity Portfolio 60 ONE JIB Fixed Income Funds 35-45 Canadian Equity 55 Global Equity 75 Founder Discount 4 General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, February 18, 2020 Item R2 Page 8 of 37 February 18, 2020 Page 9 of 11 Report No. FIN20-006 Advisory Committee Review January 28, 2020 Legal Considerations Subsection 418.1 of the Municipal Act, 2001 and Ontario Regulation 438/97 provide eligible municipalities the option to invest money that it does not require immediately. Subsection 418.1(8) imposes a duty on the Town to exercise the care, skill, diligence and judgement that a prudent investor would exercise in making the investment (i.e. the Prudent Investor Standard). The attached Investment Policy Statement provides further detail on this standard. Financial Implications The Prudent Investor regime provides municipalities with a new and very different framework through which it may manage the investment of funds that it does not require in the short term. Should a municipality meet the eligibility requirements allowing it to implement a prudent investor regime, it is able to access higher risk-adjusted returns over the long-term. In the case of the Town of Aurora, it can only feasibly adopt a PI regime through its participation in a joint investment board. As noted previously, any Town funding invested under a Prudent Investor regime will be invested in a prudent manner by professionals who will take great care in projecting the original investment value while maximizing the possible returns that can be made on these monies in an environment where there are many more investment options. Should the Town opt to become a founding member of the ONE JIB, it will be able to share in both the JIB’s start-up and on-going operating costs with other founding members making it a much more financially feasible option for the Town than establishing their own prudent investor board. As a founding member, it is also expected to receive a discount, identified in the cost comparison above, in its investment administrative costs which will further mitigate its costs of adopting a prudent investor regime. Other issues for consideration include the loss of control and management in respect of the day-to-day investment decisions relating to cash that is transferred to JIB for its management. Also, of consideration is the fact that there is no guarantee of improved investment returns and that the governance structure in the context of multiple municipalities is untested in Ontario. General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, February 18, 2020 Item R2 Page 9 of 37 February 18, 2020 Page 10 of 11 Report No. FIN20-006 Communications Considerations Based on the IAP2 Spectrum and the Town of Aurora Community Engagement Framework, the Town of Aurora will utilize the following level of engagement: Inform Consult Involve Collaborate Empower X This report will be posted to the Town website to inform residents of the upcoming transition to the prudent investor regime. Link to Strategic Plan Investment of the surplus and reserve funds of the Town, contributes to achieving the Strategic Plan guiding principle of ‘Leadership in Corporate Management’ and improves transparency and accountability to the community. Alternative(s) to the Recommendation 1. Council may choose to accept, amend or reject any or all of the recommendations of this report. Conclusions Given the opportunity for risk reduction and greater returns, the PI regime offers an advantageous opportunity that the Town of Aurora should pursue. ONE Investment is in the process of establishing a ONE JIB which will allow for the costs of set-up to participating municipalities to be significantly minimized. Should the Town of Aurora agree to join the ONE JIB as a founding member, it will be able to not only share the costs of the JIB’s establishment with the other founding members, but also share on an on-going basis access to the expert investment and municipal financial advice that is required both by legislation and the overall JIB’s success. General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, February 18, 2020 Item R2 Page 10 of 37 General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, February 18, 2020 Item R2 Page 11 of 37 DRAFT1 Topic:Investments Affects:Finance Staff Only Section:FIN-04 Replaces:September 29, 2015 Original Policy Date: June 25, 2003 Revision Date: tbd Effective Date:tbd Proposed Revision Date: tbd Prepared By:Finance Department Approval Authority: Council 1.0 Policy Statement The Town will manage the investment of the surplus cash, in accordance with the Provisions of The Municipal Act, 2001 and regulations thereto, including the current Ontario regulation 438/97 – Eligible Investment and Related Financial agreements. 2.0 Purpose The purpose of this investment policy is to ensure integrity of the investment management process. 3.0 Scope See attached. 4.0 Definitions Term:See attached. 5.0 Responsibilities See attached. 6.0 Procedure Administrative Policies & Procedures Policy No. FIN-04 – Investment Policy General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, February 18, 2020 Item R2 Page 12 of 37 DRAFTPolicy No. FIN-04 – Investment Policy 2 See attached. 7.0 Regulatory/References/Codes/Standards See attached. General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, February 18, 2020 Item R2 Page 13 of 37 DRAFT13197104.14 INVESTMENT POLICY STATEMENT FOR THE CORPORATION OF THE TOWN OF AURORA (the “Municipality”) JANUARY 21, 2020 General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, February 18, 2020 Item R2 Page 14 of 37 DRAFTii 13197104.14 TABLE OF CONTENTS OVERVIEW ................................................................................................................................................. 1 1. GLOSSARY AND DEFINITIONS .................................................................................................... 2 2. PURPOSE AND LEGISLATIVE FRAMEWORK ........................................................................... 5 2.1 Purpose of Policy ........................................................................................................................ 5 2.2 Governing Legislation ................................................................................................................ 6 2.3 Prudent Investor Standard ........................................................................................................ 6 3. MONEY REQUIRED IMMEDIATELY AND MONEY NOT REQUIRED IMMEDIATELY ......... 7 3.1 Determination of MNRI and MRI .............................................................................................. 7 3.2 Overview of Portfolios ................................................................................................................ 7 4. ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES ................................................................................................. 7 4.1 Role of ONE JIB ......................................................................................................................... 7 4.2 Role of Municipal Staff ............................................................................................................... 8 5. INVESTMENT .................................................................................................................................... 9 5.1 MRI: Short-Term Funds ............................................................................................................ 9 5.1.1 Short-Term Funds: Investment Objectives .................................................................... 9 5.1.2 Short-Term Funds: Eligible Investments ...................................................................... 10 5.2 MNRI: Long-Term Funds ......................................................................................................... 10 5.2.1 Long-Term Funds: Investment Objectives .................................................................... 10 5.2.2 Long-Term Funds: Eligible Investments ....................................................................... 11 5.2.3 Long-Term Funds: Sinking Funds ................................................................................. 12 5.2.4 Long-Term Funds: Local Distribution Corporation (LDC) Securities ........................ 12 5.2.5 Long-Term Funds: Other ................................................................................................. 12 5.3 Third Party Trust Funds and Designated Funds .................................................................. 12 5.4 Investment Management ......................................................................................................... 12 5.4.1 Investment Management of Short-Term Funds ........................................................... 12 5.4.2 Investment Management of Long-Term Funds ............................................................ 12 5.5 Transition to Prudent Investor Regime .................................................................................. 12 5.6 Investment Constraints ............................................................................................................ 13 5.6.1 Environmental, Social and Governance (ESG) Investing ........................................... 13 5.6.2 Securities Lending ............................................................................................................ 13 5.6.3 Derivatives ......................................................................................................................... 13 5.6.4 Use of Leverage ............................................................................................................... 14 5.6.5 Pooled Funds .................................................................................................................... 14 General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, February 18, 2020 Item R2 Page 15 of 37 DRAFTiii 13197104.14 5.6.6 Currency Hedging ............................................................................................................. 14 5.7 Performance Monitoring, Rebalancing and Management .................................................. 14 5.7.1 Short-Term Funds ............................................................................................................ 14 5.7.2 Long-Term Funds ............................................................................................................. 14 6. ADMINISTRATIVE POLICIES ....................................................................................................... 14 6.1 Flow of Funds and Annual Municipal Budget ....................................................................... 14 6.1.1 Transfer to ONE JIB as Part of Budget Process ......................................................... 14 6.1.2 Transfer to Municipality as Part of the Budget Process .............................................. 15 6.2 Flow of Funds Otherwise than through the Budget Process ............................................. 15 6.2.1 Surplus Funds ................................................................................................................... 15 6.2.2 Contingencies ................................................................................................................... 15 6.3 Valuation of Investments ......................................................................................................... 15 6.4 Voting Rights ............................................................................................................................. 16 6.5 Internal Controls ....................................................................................................................... 16 6.6 Custodians ................................................................................................................................. 16 6.7 Reporting ................................................................................................................................... 16 6.7.1 Short-Term Funds ............................................................................................................ 16 6.7.2 Long-Term Funds ............................................................................................................. 17 7. APPROVAL, SUBSEQUENT MODIFICATIONS AND EFFECTIVE DATE ............................ 17 7.1 Revocation / Amendment of Previous Investment Policy ................................................... 17 7.2 Modifications to the IPS ........................................................................................................... 17 7.3 Effective Date ............................................................................................................................ 18 Appendix I: ONE JIB Agreement .......................................................................................................... 19 Appendix II: ONE External Portfolio Manager Mandates .................................................................. 20 Schedule A Third Party Trust Funds and Designated Funds ........................................................... 21 General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, February 18, 2020 Item R2 Page 16 of 37 DRAFT13197104.14 Town of Aurora Investment Policy Statement OVERVIEW Municipalities that are subject to the Municipal Act, 2001 (the “Act”) have no general power to invest money. Such powers must be found either in express provisions of the Act or by necessary implication. Historically, municipalities that are subject to the Act had very limited express investment powers under section 418 of the Act. Section 418 continues to apply to all municipalities that are subject to the Act unless they elect to pass a by-law pursuant to the new section 418.1. Section 418 of the Act provides that “money that is not required immediately” (MNRI) can only be invested in securities prescribed by the Province in O. Reg. 438/97 (the “Regulation”). These prescribed securities are generally referred to as the “Legal List Securities” and are included in Part I of the Regulation. Effective January 1, 2019, the new section 418.1 of the Act came into force. Section 418.1 provides that MNRI can be invested under that section in any security, provided that in making the investment the municipality exercises the care, skill, diligence and judgment that a prudent investor would exercise in making the investment. If a municipality elects to pass a by-lawunder section 418.1, the effect will be that its MNRI must be invested in accordance with the prudent investor regime. The rules, conditions and procedures that apply to investments under section 418.1 are set out in Part II of the Regulation. Investing MNRI in Legal List Securities or in accordance with the prudent investor regime are mutually exclusive alternatives. That is to say, section 418 does not apply to a municipality that has adopted the prudent investor regime under section 418.1. Every municipality, regardless of whether section 418 or 418.1 applies to it, has MNRI and also money that is required immediately (MRI). Municipalities retain the management and control of their MRI. The Act does not include any express provisions that deal with the investment of MRI. However, it is consistent with prudent practice to invest such money until it is actually spent, in order to preserve the capital value of that money. Accordingly, it is necessarily implied that a municipality has the power to invest such money on a short term basis. Because the Act is silent as to how municipalities are to deal with MRI and because of the historical investment powers under the Act, a conservative approach is to invest MRI in appropriate Legal List Securities. Municipalities that elect to pass a by-law pursuant to the new section 418.1 include in their investment policy (i) the basis upon which they distinguish between MNRI and MRI, and (ii) principles governing the investment of each category of money. This Investment Policy Statement (IPS) is intended to respond to the foregoing requirements. Town of Aurora staff and Council understand that the funds being invested belong to the residents of Aurora. This investment and procedures documentation will ensure that all funds are invested with care, diligence and judgement of a prudent investor with a primary objective of principal preservation while maximizing returns. General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, February 18, 2020 Item R2 Page 17 of 37 DRAFT2 13197104.14 1.GLOSSARY AND DEFINITIONS The following capitalized terms are defined terms which have the meanings set out below: Act: means the Municipal Act, 2001, S.O. 2001, c. 25, as amended from time to time. Agent : means any administrator, Custodian, payment servicer, portfolio manager, investment counsel, consultant, banker, broker, dealer or other service provider engaged or appointed by ONE JIB and authorized by ONE JIB to exercise any of the functions of ONE JIB pursuant to a written agreement, in the manner and to the extent provided in the Regulation and without limiting the generality of the foregoing, Agent includes ONE Investment. Asset Mix (or Asset Allocation): means the proportion of each asset class in a portfolio. Asset classes include bank deposits, money market securities, bonds and equities, among other things. Authorizing By-law:means a by-law of a Founding Municipality which authorizes: (i) the entering into of the Initial Formation Agreement; (ii) the establishment of ONE JIB; (iii) the approval of the Client Questionnaire and the adoption of the IPS; and (iv) the entering into of the ONE JIB Agreement. Benchmark: means an index that is representative of a specific securities market (e.g. the S&P/TSX Composite Index, the FTSE/TMX 91 Day T-bill Index, etc.) against which investment performance can be compared. Performance benchmarks refer to total return indices in Canadian dollar terms. CFA Institute: refers to the global, not-for-profit professional association that administers the Chartered Financial Analyst (CFA) and the Certificate in Investment Performance Measurement (CIPM) curricula and examination programs worldwide, publishes research, conducts professional development programs, and sets voluntary, ethics-based professional and performance reporting standards for the investment industry. Custodian: means a specialized financial institution that is responsible for safeguarding a municipality's investments and is not engaged in "traditional" commercial or consumer/retail banking. Global custodians hold investments for their clients in multiple jurisdictions around the world, using their own local branches or other local custodian banks ("sub-custodians" or "agent banks"). Environmental, Social and Governance (ESG) Investing: means considering and integrating ESG factors into the investment process, rather than eliminating investments based on ESG factors alone. Integrating ESG information can lead to more comprehensive analysis of a company. External Portfolio Managers: means external third-party investment management firms whose investment offerings are accessed by ONE JIB directly or through services provided to a Pooled Fund. External Portfolio Managers are agents authorized by ONE JIB in accordance with Part II of the Regulation. Internal Controls: means a system of controls that may include authorities, policies, procedures, separation and segregation of duties, compliance checks, performance General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, February 18, 2020 Item R2 Page 18 of 37 DRAFT3 13197104.14 measurement and attribution, reporting protocols, measures for safekeeping of property and data, and the audit process. Investment Plan: means the investment plan applicable to the Long-Term Funds investments and adopted by ONE JIB under the Regulation, as it may be amended from time to time. Investment Policy Statement (IPS): means the investment policy applicable to the Municipality’s investments adopted and maintained by the Council of the Municipality for Long-Term Funds under the Regulation, and for Short-Term Funds, as the same may be amended from time to time. The IPS may also apply to the money and investments held by the Municipality for the benefit of persons other than the Municipality itself and may make reference to source(s) of money in which the Municipality may have an indirect interest but which the Municipality has no authority to invest. JIB: is short for Joint Investment Board and means a joint municipal service board that is established under section 202 of the Act by two or more municipalities for the purposes of Part II of the Regulation. Legal List Securities: means the securities and other investments and financial instruments that are included from time to time in Part I of the Regulation. Local Distribution Corporation or LDC: means a corporation incorporated under section 142 of the Electricity Act, 1998. Long-Term Funds: means the Municipality’s money that is to be used to meet financial obligations that become due more than 18 months following the date of receipt of such money and is characterized as money that is not required immediately by the Municipality as described in section 5.2. Monies that are Long Term Funds will be invested in accordance with the Prudent Investor Standard. MNRI: means money that is not required immediately Modern Portfolio Theory: means a theory of portfolio management that looks towards the portfolio as a whole, rather than towards the prudence of each investment in the portfolio. This is found in the CFA Institute Standards of Practice Handbook. MRI: means money required immediately. Municipality:means The Corporation of the Town of Aurora. ONE JIB: means ONE Joint Investment Board, established by certain founding municipalities under section 202 of the Act as a JIB for purposes of Part II of the Regulation, which is the duly appointed JIB for the Municipality, as constituted from time to time and which acts in accordance with the Act, the Regulation, the ONE JIB Agreement, including the Terms of Reference, this IPS and the Investment Plan. ONE JIB Agreement: means the agreement effective as of June 1, 2020, entered into in accordance with the requirements of the Regulation, pursuant to which ONE JIB has control and management of the Municipality’s Long-Term Funds. Operational: means the funds required to meet annual operating and capital plan needs. General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, February 18, 2020 Item R2 Page 19 of 37 DRAFT4 13197104.14 Participating Municipality: means from time to time each of the municipalities for whom ONE JIB acts as the JIB under the terms of the ONE JIB Agreement. Pooled Fund: means a unit trust established under a trust instrument, generally not available to the public, in which institutional, sophisticated or high net worth investors contribute funds that are invested and managed by an External Portfolio Manager. Funds are pooled or combined with funds of other investors. Portfolio: means any collection of funds that are grouped together and required for specific purposes. Proxy Voting: means a legal transfer to another party of a shareholder's right to vote thereby allowing shareholders who cannot attend meetings to participate. External Portfolio Managers usually vote proxies on behalf of their clients. Prudent Effective Date: means June 1, 2020, the date on which the prudent investor regime applies to the Municipality. Prudent Investor Standard: means the standard that applies when the Municipality invests money that it does not require immediately under section 418.1 of the Act. It requires the Municipality to exercise the care, skill, diligence and judgment that a prudent investor would exercise in making such an investment and the standard does not restrict the securities in which the Municipality can invest. The Prudent Investor Standard makes use of Modern Portfolio Theory and applies the standard of prudence to the entire portfolio in respect of the Municipality’s Long-Term Funds rather than to individual securities. It identifies the fiduciary's central consideration as the trade-off between risk and return as found in the CFA Institute Standards of Practice Handbook. Regulation: means Ontario Regulation 438/97. Risk: means the uncertainty of future investment returns. Risk Tolerance: means the financial ability to absorb a loss. Risk tolerance increases with the build-up of capital funding. Securities Lending: means loaning a security to another market participant. The borrower is required to deliver to the lender, as security for the loan, acceptable collateral with value greater than the value of the securities loaned. The Securities Lending program is managed by the Custodian on behalf of investors. A Securities Lending program is widely used by institutional investors to generate additional marginal returns on the total portfolio. Short-Term Funds: means money that is required immediately by the Municipality as described in section 5.1 and which remains under the control and management of the Municipality. The funds can be invested in appropriate Legal List Securities. Sinking Fund: means a fund established to fulfil the requirements to make annual contributions in respect of various debenture issues wherein money is to be regularly set aside for the payment of the principal of the debentures at maturity. Sinking Fund Required Contributions (Annual Sinking Fund Requirement): means the amount of money to be set aside each year for deposit into a sinking fund or a retirement General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, February 18, 2020 Item R2 Page 20 of 37 DRAFT5 13197104.14 fund, as applicable, for each sinking fund and term debenture issue in accordance with the Municipality’s debenture by-laws when such debentures are issued. Sinking Fund Required Earnings: means the investment earnings needed for the Sinking Fund Contributions to continue to grow to a value sufficient to repay the principal at maturity for each issue of sinking fund and term debentures. Sinking Fund Excess Earnings: means the investment earnings in excess of the required earnings. 2.PURPOSE AND LEGISLATIVE FRAMEWORK 2.1 Purpose of Policy This IPS governs the investment of the Municipality's MNRI and MRl. It is intended, among other things, to direct the Treasurer in the investment of MRI and to direct ONE Joint Investment Board (ONE JIB) in the investment of MNRI by implementing the Authorizing By-law XXXX-20 pursuant to which the Municipality authorized the establishment of guidelines for the prudent management of the Municipality's MNRI pursuant to section 418.1 of the Act. ln addition to the Municipality's MRI and MNRI, the Municipality is from time to time entrusted with the management of money and investments for a third party beneficiary ("third party trust funds"). There are also source(s) of money in which the Municipality may have an indirect interest but which the Municipality currently has no authority to invest. Such source(s) of money, referred to in this IPS as "designated funds", are listed in Schedule A attached hereto. The designated funds are identified in this IPS for the sole purpose of enabling the Municipality to better see, on an aggregated basis, the various financial assets in which the Municipality has an interest. The Municipality is not responsible for the investment activities or performance of designated funds. The goals of this IPS are to: Ɣ Define and assign responsibilities for investment of MRI and MNRI; Ɣ Describe the Municipality’s responsibilities with respect to third party trust funds and designated funds Ɣ Ensure compliance with the applicable legislation; Ɣ Direct ONE JIB as to the Municipality’s investment goals and risk tolerance; Ɣ Provide guidance and limitations regarding the investments and their underlying risks; Ɣ Establish a basis of evaluating investment performance and the underlying risks; and, Ɣ Establish a reporting standard to Council. This IPS applies to employees of the Municipality, to ONE JIB and to the employees of ONE Investment. ONE JIB, the Treasurer, and any agent or advisor providing services to ONE JIB in connection with the investment of the portfolio shall accept and strictly adhere to this IPS. General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, February 18, 2020 Item R2 Page 21 of 37 DRAFT6 13197104.14 2.2 Governing Legislation Investments of MRI will, in accordance with this IPS, only be made in Legal List Securities. Investments of MNRI are governed by the Prudent Investor Standard in accordance with Section 418.1 of the Act. This standard is similar to that which governs trustees and pension fund administrators and creates a fiduciary responsibility. Prudent investment in compliance with the Act and the Regulation enhances the potential for the Municipality to earn improved risk-adjusted rates of return. Money and investments that the Municipality holds as third party trust funds or has an interest in as designated funds will be subject to applicable legislation and any related agreements or instruments. The Act provides that the Municipalitymust consider the following criteria in planning investments of MNRI, in addition to other criteria relevant to the circumstances: Ɣ General economic conditions; Ɣ The possible effect of inflation or deflation; Ɣ The role that each investment plays within the Municipality’s total portfolio of investments; Ɣ The expected total return from income and the appreciation of capital; and Ɣ Needs for liquidity, regularity of income and preservation or appreciation of capital. 2.3 Prudent Investor Standard For MNRI, the standard to be used by the Municipality and ONE JIB shall be the “prudent investor” standard as required by section 418.1 of the Act and Part II of the Regulation in the context of managing the Municipality’s MNRI and investments thereof. Investments shall be made with the care, skill, diligence, and judgment, taking into account the prevailing circumstances, which persons of prudence, discretion and integrity would exercise in the management of investments, considering the necessity of preserving capital as well as the need for income and appreciation of capital. The Act includes a duty to obtain the advice that a prudent investor would obtain under comparable circumstances. As well, the Prudent Investor Standard makes use of Modern Portfolio Theory, which looks towards the portfolio as a whole, rather than towards the prudence of each investment in the portfolio. Officers, employees and investment agents acting in accordance with written procedures and the IPS and exercising due diligence shall take all necessary actions to optimize performance of investments on a portfolio basis, taking into account the prescribed risk and other parameters set out in this IPS and market factors. The Municipality’s staff acting in accordance with written procedures and this IPS, shall be relieved of personal responsibility for an investment’s performance, provided underperformance relative to expectations is reported to Council and the liquidation or sale of investments is carried out in accordance with this IPS. General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, February 18, 2020 Item R2 Page 22 of 37 DRAFT7 13197104.14 3.MONEY REQUIRED IMMEDIATELY AND MONEY NOT REQUIRED IMMEDIATELY 3.1 Determination of MNRI and MRI Determination of the Municipality’s MNRI is the responsibility of Council. In making the determination, Council may consider: Ɣ the time horizon within which the monies are needed to meet financial obligations Ɣ the purpose for which the monies have been collected or set aside and are to be used Ɣ the source of the money Ɣ any combination of the foregoing The Municipality’s MNRI will be comprised of money that is to be used to meet financial obligations that become due more than 18 months from the date of receipt of such money by the Municipality. For certainty, all money of the Municipality that has not been identified as MNRI (other than third party trust funds and any designated funds referenced in Section 2.1) shall be deemed for purposes of this IPS to be MRI. Determination of the Municipality’s MNRI and MRI may be modified at any time and from time to time by action of Council and with respect to specific funds by the Treasurer in accordance with the provisions of Section 6.2. Any changes in this IPS regarding the Municipality’s MNRI and MRI must be communicated immediately in writing to ONE JIB. 3.2 Overview of Portfolios The Municipality’s portfolios represent funds required for specific purposes. A high level description of each of these portfolios and their objectives is provided in Section 5 below. This IPS applies to the following money of the Municipality, its agencies, boards and commissions including: Ɣ MRI which is invested in Legal List Securities; and/or Ɣ MNRI which is invested under the prudent investor regime. 4.ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES 4.1 Role of ONE JIB ONE JIB has been appointed by the Municipality in accordance with the requirements of the Act and the Regulation and on the terms and conditions set out in the ONE JIB Agreement (Appendix I). ONE JIB exercises control and management of the Municipality’s MNRI and the investments made by it with such MNRI. Among the responsibilities of ONE JIB are the following: General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, February 18, 2020 Item R2 Page 23 of 37 DRAFT8 13197104.14 Ɣ Reviewing this IPS; Ɣ Adopting and maintaining an Investment Plan that complies with this IPS; Ɣ Engaging External Portfolio Managers, Custodians, administrators and other investment professionals (Agents); Ɣ Allocating the money and investments under its control and management among External Portfolio Managers; Ɣ Monitoring the performance of the Agents; and, Ɣ Reporting to the Municipality. The foregoing is subject to the more detailed terms and conditions contained in the ONE JIB Agreement. 4.2 Role of Municipal Staff This IPS is approved and adopted by Council with input from the Treasurer, and from ONE JIB with respect to MNRI. MRI of the Municipality, and any third party trust funds referenced in Section 2.1, remain under the control and management of the Treasurer. Consistent with this IPS, the Treasurer is responsible for the implementation of the investment program and the establishment of investment procedures which shall include: Ɣ Investment management of MRI and any third party trust funds referenced in Section 2.1 by, or under the direction of, the Treasurer; Ɣ Explicit delegation of authority regarding MNRI, and the investment thereof, to ONE JIB, which is responsible for the control and management of such funds and investments; and, Ɣ A system of controls exercised by the Treasurer to regulate the activities of Deputy Treasurers and Financial Management Advisors. No person including, without limitation, ONE JIB, may engage in an investment transaction except as provided under the terms of this IPS. In the management of MRI of the Municipality, and any third party trust funds referenced in Section 2.1, the Treasurer may engage one or more agents and service providers. ONE Investment can assist with the investment of the Municipality’s MRI, in Legal List Securities, and with the investment of third party trust funds, in accordance with the terms of the applicable trust, if permitted, at the request of the Municipality. Municipal staff involved in the investment process shall refrain from personal business activity that could conflict with the proper execution and management of the investment program, or that could impair their ability to make impartial investment decisions. Municipal staff involved in the investment procedures shall disclose any material interest in financial institutions with which they conduct business. They shall further disclose any personal financial/investment positions that could be related to the performance of the investment portfolio. Municipal staff shall not undertake personal investment transactions with the same individual with whom business is conducted on behalf of the Municipality. General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, February 18, 2020 Item R2 Page 24 of 37 DRAFT9 13197104.14 5.INVESTMENT 5.1 MRI: Short-Term Funds The Municipality’s MRI is described in this IPS as Short-Term Funds. Short-Term Funds consist of money needed to meet the financial obligations of the Municipality coming due within 18 months from the date of receipt of such money and are controlled and managed by the Treasurer. 5.1.1 Short-Term Funds: Investment Objectives The investment objectives, in the order of priority, for the Municipalityfor Short-Term Funds are: Ɣ Compliance with Portfolio Restrictions:The legal authority to invest funds comes from the Act. All investments acquired shall be in conformity with portfolio restrictions and permissions set out in O. Reg. 438/97 – Eligible Investments and Related Financial Agreements, as amended from time to time. The Municipality shall not invest in a security that is expressed or payable in any currency other than Canadian dollars. Ɣ Preservation of Principal:Investments shall be undertaken in a manner that seeks to ensure the preservation of principal in the overall portfolio. Investments shall be made with judgement and care, not for speculation, but for investment, considering the probable safety of the principal invested as well as the probable income derived. Staff shall also endeavor to mitigate credit and interest rate risk by: pre-qualifying the financial institutions, brokers/dealers and advisors with which the Municipality does business; diversifying the investment portfolio; structuring the investment portfolio so that maturing securities meet ongoing cash flow requirements; and investing operating funds primarily in shorter-term securities or approved liquid investment pools. Ɣ Maintenance of Liquidity:The investment portfolio shall remain sufficiently liquid to meet all operating requirements that may be reasonably anticipated. All non-equity investments shall be interest bearing in nature and equity exposure will be limited to investments in the ONE Investment Program equity funds. The Municipalities portfolio should be well staggered, using a ladder approach which allows investments to mature at various times and provides the Municipality the opportunity to build up the portfolio based on market conditions/opportunities. A portion of the portfolio may be placed in the ONE Investment Program, which offers compliance and liquidity. Ɣ Maximization of the Rate of Return:The Investment Portfolio shall be designed with the goal of maximizing the rate of return through budgetary and economic cycles, taking into account the investment risk constraints and liquidity needs. Staff will explore and utilize any eligible investment vehicles in building the Municipality’s investment portfolio. The investment portfolio will be managed with prudent investor principles, in order to maximize returns within established risk parameters. To take advantage of short-term fluctuations in interest rates, securities may be sold prior to maturity. Investments shall be purchased once multiple bids are received and analysed. The highest yielding bid, which meets the Municipality’s cash flow requirements, will be accepted. If the highest yielding bid is not selected, an General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, February 18, 2020 Item R2 Page 25 of 37 DRAFT10 13197104.14 explanation describing the rationale shall be provided. Staff involved will retain written records of each transaction, including the name of the financial institutions, rates quoted, description of the security, investment selected, and any special considerations that had an impact on the decision. With the goal of maximizing the rate of return on its investments, staff may utilize eligible investment vehicles for which there is a sole available supplier, such as the ONE Investment Program products. In instances such as this, multiple bids will not be solicited. 5.1.2 Short-Term Funds: Eligible Investments Short Term Funds may be invested in high quality, short-term investments that are also Legal List Securities available from banks, dealers and other financial institutions. 5.2 MNRI: Long-Term Funds The Municipality’s MNRI is described in this IPS as Long-Term Funds. In accordance with the ONE JIB Agreement and this IPS, ONE JIB has exclusive control and management of the Long-Term Funds and the investments made therewith. From time to time, the Municipalitymay require money immediately to meet financial obligations and may require ONE JIB to liquidate one or more investments in order to generate money to pay those obligations. ONE JIB will select the investment(s) to be liquidated. The timing of such liquidation will be determined by ONE JIB in consultation with the Treasurer. 5.2.1 Long-Term Funds: Investment Objectives In setting the objectives noted below, the Municipality has taken into account the following considerations: x Preservation of capital; x Adequate liquidity that takes into account the needs of financial obligations and reasonably anticipated budgetary requirements; x Diversification by asset class, market, sector, issuer, credit quality and term to maturity; x Income and capital appreciation; and, x Macro risks, such as inflation, economic growth and interest rates. The Municipalityhas identified the following investment objectives for its Long-Term Funds. Reserve Category Objective Risk Tolerance, Liquidity Investment Horizon Reserves for Existing Infrastructure Funds set aside by Council to provide funding for future major repairs, rehabilitation or Liquidity not essential, moderate risk tolerance, low to moderate 2 to 10 years General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, February 18, 2020 Item R2 Page 26 of 37 DRAFT11 13197104.14 Reserve Category Objective Risk Tolerance, Liquidity Investment Horizon replacement of the Municipality’s infrastructure. growth Reserves for New Infrastructure and Development Charges Funds primarily sourced from land development activities. Funds are used to install necessary infrastructure and improvements to maintain our service levels to our growing community. Liquidity not essential, moderate risk tolerance, low to moderate growth 2 to 10 years Special Purpose Reserve Funds Funds set aside by Council or be legislation to provide financial capacity to the Municipality for specific purposes. Liquid, moderate risk tolerance, low to moderate growth 2 to 10 years Investment of Long-Term Funds is managed by ONE JIB, which balances expected investment risks and returns to generate asset mixes that create outcomes to meet the needs and risk tolerances defined below. Returns have an impact on municipal revenues, as well as a longer term impact on future years’ budgets and should, at a minimum, keep pace with inflation. To the extent possible, the Long-Term Funds’ investment horizons are aligned with the Municipality’s obligations and may consist of liquid and illiquid securities. 5.2.2 Long-Term Funds: Eligible Investments Eligible investments for Long-Term Funds include the following offerings by ONE Investment: x ONE Investment High Interest Savings Account; x ONE Canadian Bond Fund; x ONE Canadian Corporate Bond Fund; x ONE Investment Canadian Equity Fund; x ONE Global Unconstrained Bond Fund; and, x ONE Investment Global Equity Fund. General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, February 18, 2020 Item R2 Page 27 of 37 DRAFT12 13197104.14 Additionally, nothing in this IPS prevents Long-Term Funds from being held in cash, short term money market instruments, or overnight deposits. 5.2.3 Long-Term Funds: Sinking Funds Not applicable. 5.2.4 Long-Term Funds: Local Distribution Corporation (LDC) Securities Not applicable. 5.2.5 Long-Term Funds: Other Not applicable. 5.3 Third Party Trust Funds and Designated Funds Not applicable. 5.4 Investment Management 5.4.1 Investment Management of Short-Term Funds The investment of Short-Term Funds shall be controlled and managed by the Treasurer and his/her designate as documented in By-law #6219-19, Schedule “C”. 5.4.2 Investment Management of Long-Term Funds The investment of Long-Term Funds shall be controlled and managed by ONE JIB. An investment advisor shall be retained byONE JIB to define and manage the asset allocation using External Portfolio Managers. Competent External Portfolio Managers shall be appointed by ONE JIB and they shall enter into an agreement with ONE Investment that complies with this IPS and Part II of the Regulation and provide compliance and performance reports. In accordance with the applicable regulatory requirements, ONE JIB shall make any External Portfolio Manager changes deemed in the best interest of the Municipality. For each External Portfolio Manager, ONE Investment shall agree on a set of operational guidelines including constraints, discretion limits, diversification and quality standards, and performance expectations, which are documented in each External Portfolio Manager’s guidelines. 5.5 Transition to Prudent Investor Regime Until the Prudent Effective Date, the Municipalitywill continue to control and manage its MRI, MNRI and investments in Legal List Securities. Some of such investments were made with MRI and some with MNRI. Upon and after the Prudent Effective Date, the control and management of money and investments that are determined to be not required immediately shall be given to ONE JIB. Nothing in this IPS requires that such investments need be liquidated or disposed of. It is not contrary to this IPS for investments that the Municipality does General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, February 18, 2020 Item R2 Page 28 of 37 DRAFT13 13197104.14 not require immediately to be held, and to continue to be held by ONE JIB, in instruments such as term deposits, guaranteed investment certificates or principal protected notes issued by a bank to be held to maturity and invested upon receipt of cash proceeds. Management of third party trust funds and any designated funds is not directly affected by the Prudent Effective Date. 5.6 Investment Constraints 5.6.1 Environmental, Social and Governance (ESG) Investing The Municipality supports ESG investing for Short-Term and Long-Term Funds. The investment of short term funds will be done in compliance with the investment objectives identified in section 5.1.1. Accommodating specific ESG considerations may not be possible due to conflicts with the investment objectives. For the investment of Long-Term Funds, ONE JIB is required to explore how External Portfolio Managers are implementing responsible investing principles at the time of hiring and during periodic reviews. It may report on results periodically, if requested. Accommodating specific ESG considerations may not be possible either due to availability or to costs. 5.6.2 Securities Lending For the investment of Short-Term Funds securities lending is permittedthrough ONE Investment Program investments only. For the investment of Long-Term Funds, the Municipalitymay invest in pooled funds, and other investment funds that are controlled by an External Portfolio Manager who may engage in Securities Lending if the policies of the External Portfolio Manager that apply to such pools permit such an action. 5.6.3 Derivatives Derivatives may not be used for speculative purposes. They may be used for the investment of Long-Term Funds where they are fully covered by a backing asset, e.g., as for currency or other hedging, to change portfolio duration or in covered call strategies. General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, February 18, 2020 Item R2 Page 29 of 37 DRAFT14 13197104.14 5.6.4 Use of Leverage Leverage is inherent in the use of certain types of investment strategies and instruments. Where leverage is employed, ONE JIB (for MNRI) and the Treasurer (for MRI) shall have in place monitoring procedures to manage overall exposure to any counterparty and in the aggregate. 5.6.5 Pooled Funds All investment strategies may be pursued directly through holdings of corporate and government issuers and indirectly via pooled funds and investment funds or any combination thereof. 5.6.6 Currency Hedging The Municipality’s funding requirements are in Canadian dollars. However, some exposure to foreign currencies may be desirable to provide diversification and potentially enhance returns. Therefore, it shall not be a violation of this IPS for investments in global mandates to be unhedged, in whole or in part, where the diversification benefits embedded in the currency exposure are considered to be beneficial or desirable by ONE JIB. 5.7 Performance Monitoring, Rebalancing and Management 5.7.1 Short-Term Funds For the investment of Short Term Funds, Municipality staff will monitor the cash flow needs of the Municipality on a periodic basis. Should the needs on the Municipality no longer be met by the asset mix, staff will make changes, at the discretion of the Treasurer, taking into consideration the Short Term Investment objectives. 5.7.2 Long-Term Funds For the investment of Long-Term Funds, each account’s asset mix will be monitored on a periodic basis by ONE JIB. Should the asset mixes deviate outside the ranges set out in the Investment Plan, the account will be rebalanced as soon as practicable taking into consideration variations in market liquidity and the investment objectives. Cash inflows /outflows will be used to rebalance as much as possible. If they are insufficient, investments will be sold in a commercially reasonable manner and reallocated as required. Investments are expected to achieve returns at least equal to their benchmarks measured over a rolling five-year period. ONE JIB shall provide at least annual reporting described in Section 6.6 that demonstrates the Municipality’s holdings, declares compliance with this IPS and shows External Portfolio Manager performance. 6.ADMINISTRATIVE POLICIES 6.1 Flow of Funds and Annual Municipal Budget 6.1.1 Transfer to ONE JIB as Part of Budget Process General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, February 18, 2020 Item R2 Page 30 of 37 DRAFT15 13197104.14 On an annual basis, as part of the Municipality’s budget process, the Municipality shall identify the amount, if any, of Long-Term Funds that it holds. Any Long Term Funds not already under the control and management of ONE JIB shall be transferred to ONE JIB as soon as practicable. 6.1.2 Transfer to Municipality as Part of the Budget Process On an annual basis, as part of the Municipality’s budget process, ONE JIB shall be notified by the Treasurer as to the amount, if any, required by the Municipality from the Long-Term Funds then under the control and management of ONE JIB for the Municipality’s operational purposes. Such amounts shall be deemed to be Short- Term Funds and shall be returned to the Municipality in a lump sum or by way of periodic payment as directed by the Treasurer. 6.2 Flow of Funds Otherwise than through the Budget Process 6.2.1 Surplus Funds The Short-Term Funds capture revenues received by the Municipality during each year after the approval of the Municipality’s budget for the year. Any amounts deemed to be surplus by the Treasurer at any such time during the year shall be transferred to ONE JIB to be under its management and control as Long-Term Funds. Amounts so transferred will be recorded annually in the Investment Plan and allocated by ONE JIB in accordance with the Investment Plan. 6.2.2 Contingencies The Treasurer is authorized, from time to time after the approval of the Municipality’s budget, to direct ONE JIB to return any amounts determined by the Treasurer to be required to meet expenditures for unexpected contingencies not anticipated by the Municipality’s budget in force for that year. Provided however that the aggregate of the amounts to be returned to the Municipality under this Section 6.2.2 during the year shall not exceed 25% of the Long-Term Funds under the control and management of ONE JIB as at the date that the Municipality approved its budget for the year (the Budgeted Long-Term Funds). In determining the Budgeted Long-Term Funds for purposes of calculating the 25% limit, any Long-Term Funds to be transferred to the control and management of ONE JIB in accordance with that year’s budget pursuant to Section 6.1.1 shall be included and any amount to be returned by ONE JIB to the Municipality pursuant to Section 6.1.2 shall be excluded. 6.3 Valuation of Investments Investments shall be valued at cost and at fair market value according to the values provided by the Custodian(s). For the investment of Long-Term Funds, the fair market values of unitized vehicles shall be valued according to the unit values published daily by the Custodian. Other investments shall be valued at their market value when that is available from regular public trading. If a market valuation of an investment is not available, then a fair value shall be supplied by the External Portfolio Manager to the Custodian no less frequently than quarterly. General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, February 18, 2020 Item R2 Page 31 of 37 DRAFT16 13197104.14 6.4 Voting Rights Not applicable. 6.5 Internal Controls The Treasurer shall establish an annual process of review of all investments made under this IPS. This review will provide internal control by assuring compliance with governing legislation and with policies and procedures established by the Treasurer. To the extent ONE JIB’s input is needed, these requirements will be communicated in advance to ONE JIB. 6.6 Custodians All investments and assets of the investment portfolios shall be held by a Custodian and any of the Custodian's sub-custodians or nominees. For Long-Term Funds, the Custodian shall be acceptable to ONE Investment. For Short-Term Funds the following is a list of financial institutions authorized to provide investment services to the Municipality. This list will be maintained and updated as the business environment changes: Ɣ TD Canada Trust Ɣ CIBC Wood Gundy Ɣ BMO Nesbitt Burns Inc. Ɣ RBC Dominion Securities Inc. Ɣ Raymond James Ltd. Ɣ Canaccord Genuity Ɣ ONE Investment Program 6.7 Reporting 6.7.1 Short-Term Funds For the investment of Short-Term Funds, the Treasurer shall provide an annual investment report to Council. The Investment report shall contain: Ɣ A statement about the performance of the investments during the period covered by the report; Ɣ A statement by the Treasurer as to whether or not, in their opinion, all investments are consistent with the investments policies and goals of the Municipality; Ɣ Listing of all investments by maturity date; Ɣ Percentage of total portfolio that each type of investment represents; and Ɣ Such other information that Council may request, or that the Treasurer may consider pertinent. General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, February 18, 2020 Item R2 Page 32 of 37 DRAFT17 13197104.14 6.7.2 Long-Term Funds The Regulation provides that ONE JIB shall submit an investment report to Council in respect of the investment of Long-Term Funds at least annually. Such report shall include the following. Ɣ Investment performance during the period covered by the report; Ɣ Asset mix of the total portfolio; Ɣ A listing of individual investments held at the end of the reporting period showing, where appropriate, their average term to maturity and yield relative to the benchmark, book value, market value, realized/unrealized gains/losses and actual income received; Ɣ Dates of all transactions including the purchase and sale prices; Ɣ A statement by the Treasurer as to whether all investments were made in accordance with the IPS and as to whether all investments were made in accordance with the Investment Plan; and Ɣ Any other pertinent information in the opinion of the Treasurer. All securities invested on behalf of the Municipality by ONE JIB or with the assistance of ONE Investment shall be held for safekeeping in the name of the Municipality by a Custodian, which shall provide monthly reporting showing all securities held, their book values, market values and all income received. The Treasurer shall provide quarterly to the Finance Advisory Committee a report that includes the following: Ɣ Investment performance for the period covered by the report; Ɣ The current total long term investment portfolio asset mix; Ɣ List of individual investments held as of the end of the reporting period. Where appropriate, the average term to maturity and yield relative to the benchmark/book value/market value, any realized/unrealized gains/losses and actual income received will be included for each individual investment; and Ɣ Any other pertinent information in the opinion of the Treasurer. 7.APPROVAL, SUBSEQUENT MODIFICATIONS AND EFFECTIVE DATE 7.1 Revocation / Amendment of Previous Investment Policy This policy replaces any existing investment policy of the Municipality, in its entirety, and all previous investment policies are revoked and repealed. 7.2 Modifications to the IPS At least annually Council shall review the IPS and update it, if required. In the course of reviewing the IPS, Council may request comments from the Treasurer with respect to the investment of Short-Term Funds and from ONE JIB with respect to the investment of Long-Term Funds. General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, February 18, 2020 Item R2 Page 33 of 37 DRAFT18 13197104.14 Following the Council’s review of the IPS, ONE JIB shall review the Investment Plan and update it, if required. At a minimum, the annual review will take into account: Ɣ the adequacy of funding for capital works; Ɣ the Municipality’s ability to reduce other spending; Ɣ flexibility of the timeframe to payout; and Ɣ sensitivity to loss. 7.3 Effective Date This IPS is adopted by Council of the Municipality effective June 1, 2020. The Treasurer is directed to sign a copy of this IPS to evidence approval and to deliver a copy of this IPS to ONE JIB. Signed by: Treasurer Date General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, February 18, 2020 Item R2 Page 34 of 37 DRAFT 13197104.14 Appendix I: ONE JIB Agreement General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, February 18, 2020 Item R2 Page 35 of 37 DRAFT 13197104.14 Appendix II: ONE External Portfolio Manager Mandates General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, February 18, 2020 Item R2 Page 36 of 37 DRAFT13197104.14 Schedule A Third Party Trust Funds and Designated Funds Third Party Trust Funds 1.None Designated Funds 2.None General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, February 18, 2020 Item R2 Page 37 of 37 Town of Aurora General Committee Report No. PDS20-015 Subject: Master Transportation Study Update Final Report Prepared by: Michael Bat, Traffic/Transportation Analyst Department: Planning and Development Services Date: February 18, 2020 Recommendation 1. That Report No. PDS20-015 be received; 2. That Council endorse the recommendations of the Master Transportation Study Update, in principle, subject to individual project review as part of the Capital Budget process and update the 10-Year Capital Plan accordingly; and, 3. That staff be directed to circulate the Master Transportation Study Update to York Region and relevant Town’s Divisions. Executive Summary This report presents to Council the findings and conclusions of the Transportation Master Plan (the TMP). The TMP provides both short-term and long-term recommendations to service Aurora’s projected growth and identifies opportunities to create a sustainable, safe and accessible mobility network. The TMP consists of the following key components and discussions: • The key planning context and relevant background studies were reviewed to ensure the recommendations are consistent with the objectives envisioned by the Government of Ontario, York Region and the Town of Aurora; • The TMP has been prepared in accordance with the Municipal Class Environmental Assessment (MCEA) Master Plan process; • The TMP identified the existing traffic operational concerns and recommended Alternative No. 2 “TDM, Transit, and Active Transportation Improvements” and Alternative No. 3 “Operational Improvements” as viable alternative solutions to accommodate future growth; General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, February 18, 2020 Item R3 Page 1 of 34 February 18, 2020 Page 2 of 14 Report No. PDS20-015 • The TMP included a safety review at key intersections with the highest number of recorded collisions and mitigation strategies were recommended; • The implementation of a road diet on Yonge Street will enhance safety for all road users and create a pedestrian oriented environment; • Existing traffic diversions can be mitigated through the implementation of appropriate strategies to discourage route choices within local streets; • Short-term opportunities and long-term planning were recommended to address existing demand and future parking needs within the Town; • A Sidewalk Priority Plan has been developed by incorporating Aurora’s Sidewalk Gap Map and the 10-Year Construction Plan; and, • A comprehensive and well-connected cycling network has been developed for the Town to promote cycling activities. The Executive Summary of the TMP is provided in Attachment 1. Background As approved by Council as part of the 2018 Capital Budget process, the Town initiated Capital Project No. 34529 – Master Transportation Study Update. The key objective of the study is to review and address existing transportation needs and provide support for Aurora’s forecasted growth to 2041 through long-term infrastructure planning and policy related solutions. This study builds upon the Town’s 2013 Master Transportation Operations Study Update, which took a multi-modal approach to identify road network improvements and active transportation connections to meet Aurora’s future traffic demands. General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, February 18, 2020 Item R3 Page 2 of 34 February 18, 2020 Page 3 of 14 Report No. PDS20-015 Analysis The key planning context and relevant background studies were reviewed to ensure the recommendations are consistent with the objectives envisioned by the Government of Ontario, York Region and the Town of Aurora To ensure the recommendations of the TMP are consistent with the objective envisioned by the Government of Ontario and York Region, the following key planning context and relevant background studies were reviewed: • York Region Official Plan; • York Region Transportation Master Plan; • York Region 10-Year Roads and Transit Capital Construction Program; • York Region Lake to Lake Cycling and Walking Trail; • Provincial Policy Statement 2014; • Provincial Growth Plan 2019; • Highway 404 Class Environmental Assessment and Preliminary Design Study; • Town of Aurora Strategic Plan; • Town of Aurora Official Plan; • Town of Aurora Trails Master Plan; • Town of Aurora OPA 73: Area 2C Secondary Plan; • Aurora Promenade Concept Plan, Streetscape Design & Implementation Plan; • Metrolinx Barrie Rail Corridor Expansion; • Metrolinx Wellington Street Grade Separation; and, • Metrolinx 2016 GO Rail Station Access Plan. A description for each above referenced documents are provided in Attachment 2. The TMP was prepared in accordance with the Municipal Class Environmental Assessment (MCEA) Master Plan process This study was conducted in two phases in accordance with the requirements of Phases 1 and 2 of the Municipal Class EA which is an approved process under the Environmental Assessment Act: • Phase 1: Identify the problem (deficiency) or opportunity; and, General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, February 18, 2020 Item R3 Page 3 of 34 February 18, 2020 Page 4 of 14 Report No. PDS20-015 • Phase 2: Identify alternative solutions to address the problem or opportunity by taking into consideration the existing environment, and establish the preferred solution taking into account public and review agency input. The TMP reviewed the existing traffic operational concerns and recommended Alternative No. 2 “TDM, Transit, and Active Transportation Improvements” and Al ternative No. 3 “Operational Improvements” as viable solutions to accommodate future growth A transportation needs analysis based on projected growth to 2041 is documented to identify the need for growth related transportation improvements to the existing transportation network. A total of four alternatives were identified and assessed: • Alternative No. 1 – “Do Nothing”; • Alternative No. 2 – “TDM, Transit, and Active Transportation Improvements”; • Alternative No. 3 – “Operational Improvements”; and, • Alternative No. 4 – “Road Capacity Improvements”. Alternative No. 1 “Do Nothing” and Alternative No. 4 “Road Capacity Improvements” are not recommended given the traffic congestion issues identified (Alternative No 1) and the fact that investing heavily into infrastructure improvements (Alternative No. 4) without mitigation through Transportation Demand Management (TDM) and operational improvements does not represent a viable strategy. Detailed assessment for each alternative are provided in Attachment 3 and the following solutions are recommended: a) Alternative No. 2 – TDM, Transit, and Active Transportation Improvements: This alternative proposes that the Town continue to work in partnership with York Region, SmartCommute Central York, Metrolinx, and the development industry to implement Travel Demand Management (TDM) policies and programs that encourage non-automobile travel to and from key destinations within and surrounding the Town. Based on Provincial and Regional directions to encourage transit oriented development and sustainable travel, as well as the Town’s own Strategic Plan, Alternative No. 2 is recommended. General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, February 18, 2020 Item R3 Page 4 of 34 February 18, 2020 Page 5 of 14 Report No. PDS20-015 b) Alternative No. 3 – Operational Improvements: Operational improvements may take the form of traffic signal timing adjustments, traffic lane changes, safety improvements, parking modifications and sidewalk network improvements. On the basis that these have little impact to the existing built form of the Town with the ability to provide significant operational benefits, Alternative No. 3 is recommended. The estimated cost associated with this alternative will be funded by the individual projects as identified. The TMP included a safety review at key intersections with the highest number of recorded collisions and mitigation strategies were recommended As part of the TMP update, an operations and safety review was conducted to summarize and discuss the key findings based upon a detailed collision analysis and site visits to identify possible contributing factors for the high collision intersections within the Town of Aurora. a) Yonge Street Traffic Operations Analysis: Along the Yonge Street corridor, a capacity and level of service analysis and a progression analysis were conducted to identify any potential improvements to address existing operational issues. Following the optimization process, improvements are minor in nature. It appears that the corridor has already been coordinated, and this existing conditions analysis confirms that the implemented improvements continue to be operating well. At this time, current signal timing should be maintained; however, operations should be consistently reviewed to ensure signal coordination is optimized. In addition, the Town is collaborating with the Region to install a dedicated southbound right turn lane at the Yonge Street and Wellington Street intersection, the detailed design is currently underway. b) Town-wide Safety Review: The top ten intersections with the highest number of collisions recorded for the past five years (provided by York Regional Police) were chosen for analysis. They are generally located on Yonge Street within the downtown core area between Orchard Heights Boulevard / Batson Drive and Henderson Drive / Allaura Boulevard. General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, February 18, 2020 Item R3 Page 5 of 34 February 18, 2020 Page 6 of 14 Report No. PDS20-015 The top ten intersections are illustrated in Attachment 4. Based on the review of the existing conditions of the above noted intersections coupled with external factors (i.e. collision types and road conditions) the following mitigation opportunities are recommended: • Smaller Corner Radii: reducing the radius of the corner curbs (the curb radii) on streets (e.g. Orchard Heights Boulevard and Batson Drive) can improve safety; • Traffic Signal Modifications: converting signal timings from protected/permissive to protected-only left-turns from Yonge Street; and, • Yonge Street Road Diet: modify the existing four lane cross-section with two lanes per travel direction to a three lane cross-section with single lane per travel direction plus a centre two-way left turn lane (TWLTL), detailed discussion on this option will be provided in the subsequent section. The implementation of a road diet on Yonge Street will enhance safety for all road users and create a pedestrian oriented environment A road diet on Yonge Street through the downtown core area should be considered to improve operations and safety. Although Yonge Street from south of Orchard Heights Boulevard/Batson Drive to Golf Links Drive/Dunning Avenue is under jurisdiction of the Town, close coordination with York Region is required particularly at the critical Yonge and Wellington intersection and also to address the implications on the YRT/Viva service on Yonge Street. a) Road Diet Concept: Road diet is generally referred to as a transportation improvement concept that reconfigures a four lane cross-section with two lanes per travel direction to three lane cross-section with single lane per travel direction plus a centre two-way left turn lane (TWLTL). This configuration provides storage for left-turn movements while additional space at the existing curbs may be utilized for either bike lanes, additional public realm / sidewalk width, or parking lay-bys depending on the existing pavement width, and the presence of side-streets and the need for the centre TWLTL. The TMP recommends the implementation of road diet on Yonge Street from south of Orchard Heights Boulevard/Batson Drive to Golf Links Drive/Dunning Avenue. This section was chosen based on an assessment of the adjacent land use character and driveway frequency. This segment of Yonge Street was identified for analysis purposes General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, February 18, 2020 Item R3 Page 6 of 34 February 18, 2020 Page 7 of 14 Report No. PDS20-015 only and further study is required to confirm the most appropriate section to consider for a road diet. A road diet concept is illustrated in Attachment 5. b) Yonge-Wellington Intersection Capacity: The intersection of Yonge Street & Wellington Street was selected to test the road diet concept as it would be the most impacted in terms of capacity constraints. Under 2041 road diet conditions, overall operations will improve at the intersection from a capacity perspective. c) Conceptual Sightlines Analysis: With the road diet, the intersection of Yonge Street and Wellington Street may be reconfigured with exclusive, opposing left-turn lanes. By removing shared through-left lanes, sightlines and overall intersection safety should improve. A conceptual sightlines analysis is illustrated in Attachment 6. d) Compatibility with York Region’s Transportation Master Plan: Map 15 of York Region’s TMP illustrates the proposed 2032-2041 Transit Network. Although there are plans for Yonge Street (within York Region) to be a dedicated rapidway corridor, the map shows that regular curbside service will continue through the downtown core area of Aurora. Therefore, a road diet along Yonge Street through the Town of Aurora does not conflict with York Region Transit’s vision. Configuration of bus stops with the lane reduction would require further study as it would not be preferable for buses to stop within the single lane and thus causing traffic queues during boarding and un-boarding. e) Next Steps: Due to the many benefits to safety and operations noted in this analysis, particularly to operations and safety at Yonge-Wellington and at other intersections along the corridor, it is recommended that further public consultation (particularly with the residents and/or businesses) and the Town work with York Region to advance the planning of a potential road diet for Yonge Street from south of Orchard Heights Boulevard/Batson Drive to Golf Links Drive/Dunning Avenue. General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, February 18, 2020 Item R3 Page 7 of 34 February 18, 2020 Page 8 of 14 Report No. PDS20-015 Should Council decide to proceed with the Yonge Street road diet feasibility study, funding for a detailed design will be required, which will form part of the 2021 Capital Budget process. Existing traffic diversions can be mitigated through the implementation of appropriate strategies to discourage route choices within local streets a) External Traffic Diversion: External traffic diversion represents traffic originating from adjacent municipalities north of the Town including Newmarket and King, diverting through residential streets in the Town to avoid major arterial roads and intersections. The key findings are summarized below: • Aurora Heights Drive and Mark Street act as commuter routes for external traffic wishing to avoid congestion on Bathurst Street, Yonge Street, and Wellington Street; and, • Centre Street remains used as a pass-through route for external traffic despite AM peak restrictions and one-way conversion between Spruce Street and Wells Street. b) Internal Traffic Diversion: Internal traffic diversion represents traffic originating in the Town that uses a pass- through road to arrive at a destination within the Town. The key findings are summarized below: • Similar to external traffic, Mark Street is used by Aurora residents to bypass the Yonge-Wellington intersection. From Mark Street, traffic likely utilizes Walton Drive or Industrial Parkway via Centre Street to access Wellington Street; • Centre Street is a pass-through route for both internal and external traffic despite AM peak restrictions and one-way conversion between Spruce Street and Wells Street; and, • A significant number of trips to or from the block west of Yonge Street utilize residential streets east of Yonge Street to avoid congestion at the Yonge- Wellington intersection. The above concerns can potentially be addressed by improvements at the Yonge- Wellington intersection. These improvements are critical to mitigating pass-through General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, February 18, 2020 Item R3 Page 8 of 34 February 18, 2020 Page 9 of 14 Report No. PDS20-015 traffic volumes east of Yonge Street, including improving operations for all movements at the intersection which may be achieved through the proposed southbound right turn lane and/or implementation of a road diet concept. Short-term opportunities and long-term planning were recommended to address existing demand and future parking needs within the Town A parking needs assessment was undertaken as part of the TMP to document current parking conditions within the Aurora Promenade, including Yonge Street from Wellington to Church Street, Library Square, and the Aurora GO Station area. Based on this review, short-term opportunities to address parking issues are identified as well as development of a long-term plan for parking. a) Short-term Recommendations (1-5 Years): • GO Station parking: the Aurora GO Station should continue to be monitored to ensure that there is no overflow during its actual peak hours on busy weekdays. Temporary parking solutions at Town Park, Sheppard’s Bush Parking Lot on Industry Street and the Sheppard’s Bush Soccer Filed should be considered; • On-Street parking on Yonge Street: if the traffic demand along Yonge Street from Wellington Street to Church Street increases, on-street parking along this segment should be strictly enforced to maximize safety and reduce congestion; • Metrolinx is proposing to construct a new surface parking lot at 9 Scanlon Court with an estimated supply of more than 400 parking spaces. This is primarily to off-set the loss of existing Berczy Street surface parking lot on the west side of the rail corridor related to the new platform construction; • As part of the proposed Wellington Street Grade Separation project, Berczy Street will be realigned and there will be reduction in the number of parking spaces related to this project; and, • Library Square: a Parking Study prepared by BA Group was developed to address the parking needs from the proposed Library Square development. The BA parking study recommends the following options and it is being updated to reflect the current development proposal: o Short-term: revisit Yonge Street parking restrictions, increase on-street parking supply, encourage long-term parking in less desirable lots and implementation of TDM; General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, February 18, 2020 Item R3 Page 9 of 34 February 18, 2020 Page 10 of 14 Report No. PDS20-015 o Medium-term: construct layby parking on Church Street and build additional parking on-site (e.g. below-grade or above-grade parking structure), and, o Long-term: consolidate area parking (e.g. consolidate surface parking lot and/or off-site below-grade parking structure with development above). b) Long-term Recommendations (Greater Than 5 Years): • Consolidate private lots in the downtown core area: consolidation of private lots into municipally owned and managed lots promotes efficiency in land use, creates land for new development, and results in increased pedestrian activity in the area. This may be achieved through new development application process and/or land acquisition. It is to be noted that land acquisition costs requires further consideration if this option will be considered; • 215 Industrial Parkway South: this is a property owned by the Town of Aurora and is currently leased to John Graves Simcoe Armoury. Although this property is located outside of the study limits, there is a possibility of this property to be converted to municipal parking lot in the future, if necessary; • Implement on-street parking policies: consideration for on-street parking policies should be developed through further study to prevent GO commuters from parking on adjacent residential streets, including clear signage and information on where the appropriate over-flow parking is located; and, • Implement permitting for on-street parking: provide residents the opportunity to apply for on-street parking permits for accessible users. Further study is required to determine an appropriate solution to address area specific needs. c) Aurora GO Station Parking Recommendations: Based on the April 2017 parking utilization study undertaken for Metrolinx for the Aurora GO Station (prepared by Wood Group), three sites should be considered as supplemental parking sites which may either specifically support the GO station or be formalized as municipal parking lots. These include Town Park, Sheppard’s Bush Soccer Field, and Sheppard’s Bush, which are the only three lots within a 400m or approximately 5 to 10 minute walking distance to the Aurora GO station platform. • Town Park: based on the parking surveys, during the Friday PM Peak the parking spaces surrounding the Town Park are under-utilized. Recommend to General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, February 18, 2020 Item R3 Page 10 of 34 February 18, 2020 Page 11 of 14 Report No. PDS20-015 revisit the existing parking restrictions (maximum 3 hours from 6 AM and 6 PM, Monday to Friday) and allow parking in these spaces to improve utilization of the infrastructure during the weekdays and avoid illegal parking; • Sheppard’s Bush Soccer Field: this parking lot can provide a supplement space for parking. Although not surveyed by the TMP, the parking characteristics would likely be characteristic of other recreational facilities with low utilization during weekday daytime, and higher during weekday evenings and weekends. It is recommended to revisit the existing parking restrictions; and, • Sheppard’s Bush: it is recommended that the Town engage with Lake Simcoe Region Conservation Authority and Metrolinx to discuss the feasibility of this option and revisit the existing parking restrictions (maximum 3 hours from 7 AM and 7 PM, Monday to Friday). It is recommended the Town to work with Metrolinx to develop a parking strategy for the Aurora GO train commuters. The above referenced locations are illustrated in Attachment 7. A Sidewalk Priority Plan has been developed by incorporating Aurora’s Sidewalk Gap Map and the 10-Year Construction Plan A review of the current 2020 Sidewalk Gap Map as well as Aurora’s current 10-year Construction Plan (2016-2027) was undertaken to develop a Sidewalk Priority List that will identify the priority in which the sidewalk gaps within the Town should be addressed. Funding requests related to construction of sidewalks is usually included in the 10-Year Road Reconstruction Plan and is subject to Capital Budget process. The recommended sidewalk construction plan is provided in Attachment 8. A comprehensive and well-connected cycling network has been developed for the Town to promote cycling activities A comprehensive review was conducted to identify opportunities for new on-street cycling facilities with a focus on appropriately designating space for cyclists between existing curbs, which can be implemented in a cost effective manner. Recommendations build on the Town’s existing and planned cycling network and are supported by a best practices review of design guidelines including travel and parking lane widths and considerations at intersections. General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, February 18, 2020 Item R3 Page 11 of 34 February 18, 2020 Page 12 of 14 Report No. PDS20-015 The TMP recommends that a separate Town-wide Active Transportation Master Plan be developed. Staff will be submitting a funding request to undertake this study as part of the 2021 Capital Budget process. A list of cycling facility types is provided in Attachment 9 and the recommended cycling network is included in Attachment 10. Advisory Committee Review Not applicable. Legal Considerations None. Financial Implications The initiatives and individual projects identified in the TMP will be subject to review as part of the Capital Budget process. Communications Considerations Once the TMP is endorsed by Council, staff will issue the Notice of Completion (advertised in the Town’s media channels) and the study will be placed on the public record for a 30-day review period. Link to Strategic Plan This report supports the Strategic Plan goal of Support an Exceptional Quality of Life for All by examining traffic patterns and identify potential solutions to improve movement and safety at key intersections in the community. Alternative to the Recommendation 1. That Council to provide direction. General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, February 18, 2020 Item R3 Page 12 of 34 February 18, 2020 Page 13 of 14 Report No. PDS20-015 Conclusions This report presents to Council the findings and conclusions developed as part of the TMP. The TMP provides both short-term and long-term recommendations to address the projected growth and identifies opportunities to create a sustainable, safe and accessible mobility network. The following key recommendations are provided: • To address future traffic growth, Alternative No. 2 “TDM, Transit, and Active Transportation Improvements” and Alternative No. 3 “Operational Improvements” are recommended as viable solutions; • Intersection safety can be improved through the implementation of smaller corner radii, traffic signal modifications and/or a Yonge Street road diet; • It is recommended the Town to proceed with the study to examine the feasibility of implementing a road diet on Yonge Street; • Consider implementation of short-term and long-term solutions to address existing parking demand and future parking needs for the Town; • As complementary to Alternative No. 2 “TDM, Transit, and Active Transportation Improvements”, it is recommended that sidewalk gaps identified in the Sidewalk Construction Plan be addressed and begin to implement the cycling network as illustrated in Attachment 3; and, • A separate Town-wide Active Transportation Master Plan is recommended which is subject to capital funding as part of a future Capital Budget process. Attachments Attachment 1: TMP Executive Summary Attachment 2: List of Key Planning Context and Relevant Background Studies Attachment 3: List of Alternative Solutions Attachment 4: Top Ten Intersections with Highest Number of Collisions Attachment 5: Road Diet Concept Attachment 6: Conceptual Sightlines Analysis Attachment 7: Possible Additional Parking Area for Aurora GO Station Attachment 8: Recommended Sidewalk Construction Plan General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, February 18, 2020 Item R3 Page 13 of 34 General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, February 18, 2020 Item R3 Page 14 of 34 7RZQRI$XURUD | Master Transportation Study Executive Summary i Executive Summary The Town of Aurora has initiated a Master Transportation Study (MTS) to review and address existing transportation needs within the Town, as well as provide support for the growth of the Town to 2041, through long-term infrastructure planning and policy solutions. This study builds upon the Town’s 2013 Master Transportation Operations Study Update, which took a multi-modal approach to identifying road network improvements and active transportation connections to meet future traffic demands. As the population, employment, and economic activity within the Town continues to increase, there is an opportunity to consider the new mobility challenges and rising parking demand in conjunction with the development of local and regional initiatives such as The Aurora Promenade Concept Plan and the Barrie Rail Corridor Expansion (BRCE). The MTS seeks to develop an integrated set of road network and infrastructure solutions that continue to accommodate vehicles, cyclists, pedestrians, and transit users, while streamlining the improvements to preserve the small-town community characteristics of the Town, and particularly, the Town’s historic downtown core. The MTS also seeks to encourage alternative mobility options and provide more accessible, convenient, and direct connections to Major Transit Stations and public transit. This report documents the findings and recommendations from several inter-related studies including a Future Conditions Assessment, Traffic Operations and Safety Review, Traffic Infiltration Assessment, Parking Needs Assessment, and a Sidewalk Priority Plan. The key findings and recommendations of each of these analyses is summarized in the following sections. Future Conditions The Town of Aurora is planned to grow from approximately 63,000 persons and 29,000 jobs today to approximately 79,000 persons and 38,000 jobs by 2041. With consideration for planned Regional infrastructure improvements, an assessment of 2041 conditions was completed to understand the need for further action and investment by the Town to plan for growth. Four Alternative Solutions were identified: 1. Do Nothing 2. Travel Demand Management (TDM), Transit and Active Transportation Improvements 3. Operational Improvements 4. Road Widenings $WWDFKPHQW 703([HFXWLYH6XPPDU\ General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, February 18, 2020 Item R3 Page 15 of 34 7RZQRI$XURUD | Master Transportation Study Executive Summary ii Based on the analysis presented, Alternatives 1 and 4 were screened out while Alternative 2 and 3 were recommended to be carried forward. It is thus recommended that the Town’s transportation strategy to accommodate growth to the year 2041 focus on managing the existing network while improving connectivity and safety particularly for pedestrians and cyclists. This includes focus on travel demand management (TDM), supporting and encouraging transit use, and active transportation improvements including completing the sidewalk network and implementing the recommendations of the 2011 Trails Master Plan. To keep vehicular traffic moving efficiently, operational improvements are recommended such as traffic signal timing adjustments, travel lane modifications, safety improvements, and parking management. It is noted that after accounting for planned Regional improvements, no major vehicular capacity improvements, such as lane widenings, are required by 2041. Traffic Operations and Safety Traffic Signal Progression Analysis Following the optimization process, improvements were minor in nature. It appears that the corridor has already been coordinated, and this existing conditions analysis confirms that the implemented improvements continue to be operating well. Safety Review A desktop review of the top five intersections for most collisions spans Yonge Street from Orchard Heights Boulevard/Batson Drive to Murray Drive/Edward Street. Based on the collision analysis it was noted that the most frequent collisions that occurred were turning movement and rear-end. These accidents could be attributed to the fact that most of the road segment along Yonge Street (Aurora Heights Drive/Mark Street to Golf Links Drive/Dunning Avenue) consists of two travel lanes in each direction with no dedicated left turn or right turn lanes. This, coupled with the number of private driveways along Yonge Street is problematic because drivers may suddenly slow down to turn, while other drivers may be following too closely, or being distracted. Exclusive left-turn lanes for driveway access and opposing left-turn lanes at intersections would benefit both traffic operations and safety. However the constrained right-of-way along Yonge Street through the Aurora Promenade area would not be able to accommodate a fifth lane without significant property acquisition to increase available right-of-way. As such, making these improvements would require a “road diet” reducing the number of through travel lanes from four to two. Yonge Street Road Diet A road diet is a technique used in transportation planning whereby the number of travel lanes on the road is reduced. A potential road diet of Yonge Street from south of General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, February 18, 2020 Item R3 Page 16 of 34 7RZQRI$XURUD | Master Transportation Study Executive Summary iii Orchard Heights Boulevard/Batson Drive to Golf Links Drive/Dunning Avenue is recommended for further study. Based on the analysis in this document, a road diet would have benefits to safety and operations at Yonge-Wellington and at other intersections along the corridor. Following the completion of the Master Transportation Study, it is recommended that the Town conduct further public consultation and detailed study in coordination with York Region to better understand the impacts on the community as well as on the planned transit services along Yonge Street. Traffic Diversion Analysis The following Town streets identified as commuter routes 1 through a traffic diversion analysis should be considered for enhanced safety measures to minimize speeds and prioritize safety for all road users: x Aurora Heights Drive from Bathurst Street to Yonge Street x Mark Street, Walton Drive x Maple Street x Catherine Avenue x Centre Street As these routes are in the vicinity of the Yonge-Wellington intersection, improvements at that location may also mitigate speeding along these commuter diversion routes. Finally, while it is noted that traffic diversion has occurred on Elderberry Trail from April 2017 to March 2018, the causes are not apparent. It is recommended that the Town continue to monitor the situation to determine whether the issue is due to one-time incidents or if there is a broader contextual issue which is not apparent through this analysis. Parking Needs A parking utilization study was conducted to provide direction on short-term and long- term needs for parking particularly in the Old Town and surrounding the GO Station. Short-term Recommendations GO Station Parking Demand: The Aurora GO Station should be monitored closely to ensure that there is no overflow during its actual peak hours on busy weekdays. If there is a consistent lack of supply to address high parking demand at the GO Station parking lots, temporary parking solutions should be provided to minimize conflict with neighbouring business owners and residents, including formalizing usage of the Town Park / Farmers Market parking spaces, the Sheppard’s Bush Parking Lot on Industry 1 A road or transit line that is periodically used to travel between one’s place of residence and place of work General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, February 18, 2020 Item R3 Page 17 of 34 7RZQRI$XURUD | Master Transportation Study Executive Summary iv Street, and the Sheppard’s Bush Soccer Field. Supplemental works would be required to provide sidewalks and/or lighting to improve safety between the GO station and these potential overflow parking lots. On-Street Parking on Yonge Street: If the traffic demand along Yonge Street from Wellington Street to Church Street increases, the on-street parking along this segment should be strictly enforced to maximize safety and reduce congestion. On-street parking along a high demand corridor will increase. Long-term Needs and Recommendations Consolidate private lots in the Old Town: Consolidation of private lots into municipally owned and managed lots promotes efficiency in land use, creates land for new development, and results in increased pedestrian activity in the area. This change could be considered alongside potential changes to on-street parking along Yonge Street through a potential Road Diet. 215 Industrial Parkway South: This is a property owned by the Town of Aurora and is currently leased as the headquarters for the Queen’s York Rangers Army Cadet Corps. Although this property is located outside of the study limits, there is a possibility of this property being served as an additional parking lot in the future, if necessary. Given its distance from high demand locations in the Town, this site is likely best utilized or considered as an off-site parking location for autonomous vehicles. While policy and legislation regarding these vehicles remains to be determined, it is recognized that the Town should proactively protect lands for this type of use which may effectively reduce parking needs within its growth and intensification areas. Implement on-street parking policies: Consideration for on-street parking policies should be developed through further study to prevent GO commuters from parking on quiet residential streets, including clear signage and information on where the appropriate over-flow parking is located. Implement permitting for on-street parking: provide residents the opportunity to apply for on-street parking permits for accessible users. Further study is required to determine an appropriate solution to site-specific needs. Sidewalk Priority Plan A gap analysis was conducted to identify and prioritize the construction of new sidewalks in the Town. Based on the Sidewalk Gap Map and Aurora’s 10-year Road Reconstruction Map, it is recommended that sidewalks along Harriman Road and Industrial Parkway South (Engelhard Drive to Industry Street) be constructed in 2020/2021 along with the planned road reconstruction in order to save on costs. Based on the evaluation, eleven streets have been identified as having high priority for sidewalk installation and should be considered to be included in the 1-5 year plan. The medium to low priority sidewalk installation should be considered to be included General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, February 18, 2020 Item R3 Page 18 of 34 7RZQRI$XURUD | Master Transportation Study Executive Summary v in the 5-10 year plan. The revised plan for sidewalk construction is provided in 7DEOH (6. 7DEOH(65HYLVHG6LGHZDON&RQVWUXFWLRQ3ODQ 675((71$0( 5(9,6('352326('<($52)&216758&7,21 +,*+0(',80/2: Adair Drive 9 Bailey Crescent 9 Baldwin Road 9 Bathurst Street 99 Bayview Avenue 99 Berczy Street 99 Collins Crescent 99 Corbett Crescent 99 Davidson Road 9 Duncton Wood Crescent 99 Edward Street 9 Harriman Road 9 Henderson Drive 9 Hillview Road 99 Holman Crescent 9 Hutchinson Road 99 Industrial Parkway North 9 Industrial Parkway South (Vandorf Sideroad – Industry Street.) 9 Industrial Parkway South (Yonge St. – Vandorf Sideroad) 9 Industry Street 9 Johnson Road 9 Kitimat Crescent 99 Knowles Crescent 99 Limeridge Street 99 Morning Crescent 99 Patrick Drive 99 St. John's Sideroad East 9 St. John's Sideroad West 99 Stoddart Drive 99 General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, February 18, 2020 Item R3 Page 19 of 34 7RZQRI$XURUD | Master Transportation Study Executive Summary vi 675((71$0( 5(9,6('352326('<($52)&216758&7,21 +,*+0(',80/2: Vandorf Sideroad 9 Webster Drive 99 Wellington Street West 99 Woodland Hills Boulevard 9 Yonge Street 9 9 9 99 99 99 Current proposed construction Revised from current proposed construction +LJK3ULRULW\ Medium Priority Low Priority Cycling Facilities A study was conducted to identify opportunities for new on-street cycling facilities with a focus on appropriately designating space for cyclists between existing curbs, which can be implemented in a cost effective manner. Recommendations build on the Town’s existing and planned cycling network and are supported by a best practices review of design guidelines including travel and parking lane widths and considerations at intersections. Based on existing pavement width, road type, and vehicle speed and volumes on the road, )LJXUH(6 builds on the existing cycling network in the Town of Aurora and illustrates the recommended cycling facilities. General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, February 18, 2020 Item R3 Page 20 of 34 7RZQRI$XURUD | Master Transportation Study Executive Summary vii )LJXUH(65HFRPPHQGHG&\FOLQJ)DFLOLWLHVGeneral Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, February 18, 2020 Item R3 Page 21 of 34 a) York Region Official Plan: The York Region Official Plan 2010 was last consolidated in April 2016 and it outline growth management policies for York Region and provides a basis for detailed planning at the local municipal level. These policies are to be supported and implemented through a set of regional guidelines, strategies and plans, including the updated York Region Transportation Master Plan and the York Region Pedestrian and Cycling Master Plan. b) York Region Transportation Master Plan: The Transportation Master Plan was updated in 2016 providing the Region with direction on policies and actions required to support growth and intensification up to 2041. The objectives of the 2016 Transportation Master Plan include improving the regional transit system to be more interconnected, developing a road network that supports all modes of transportation, and integrating active transportation in Urban Areas. c) York Region 10-Year Roads and Transit Capital Construction Program: A number of road and transit network improvements within the Town are scheduled in the York Region 2018 – 10 Year Roads and Transit Capital Construction Program. d) York Region Lake to Lake Cycling and Walking Trail: The concept of the York Region’s Lake to Lake Cycling and Walking Trail was proposed in the 2008 Pedestrian and Cycling Master Plan. The route runs between Lake Simcoe in the northern edge of the Region to Lake Ontario in the City of Toronto. e) Town of Aurora Strategic Plan: The Town’s Strategic Plan addresses transportation directly under the Community Pillar of Success. With the goal of supporting an exceptional quality of life for all, Objective 1 is to improve transportation, mobility, and connectivity. f) Town of Aurora Official Plan: The 2010 Official Plan of the Town of Aurora is the primary tool for the Town to guide its growth and development. The OP is written in accordance with Provincial policies and the York Region’s policies to achieve the Town’s development objectives in the short and long term. The policies in the OP emphasize development of a complete community, environmental responsibility, support for transit, and the efficient use of infrastructure. Attachment 2 List of Key Planning Context and Relevant Background Studies General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, February 18, 2020 Item R3 Page 22 of 34 g) Town of Aurora Trails Master Plan: The Town of Aurora’s Trails Master Plan was completed in 2011 as a long-term, 50- year plan which provides recommendations for a connected trails network, design of off-road trails, policies related to trail planning, potential education and promotion programs that support trail use and healthy living, and a phased implementation strategy. The Plan includes a Town-wide Trail Route Network by Facility Type which summarizes the recommended network including new proposed on and off-street facilities, Nokiidaa and Oak Ridges Trail alignments, potential grade separated trail crossings, and potential new linkages. h) Town of Aurora OPA 73: Area 2C Secondary Plan: The Area 2C lands are located in the northeast corner of the Town of Aurora bounded by Highway 404 and St. John’s Sideroad to the east and north respectively, with the southern and western boundaries formed by existing residential subdivisions and commercial land uses. Over the next 20 years, these lands are slated to accommodate between 8,000 and 9,000 new residents as well as 4,400 and 5,500 employment opportunities. i) Aurora Promenade Concept Plan, Streetscape Design & Implementation Plan: The Aurora Promenade includes the historic downtown core of the Town of Aurora. The policies regarding the Aurora Promenade within the Town’s Official Plan are based on the 2010 Aurora Promenade Concept Plan and are to be further implemented through the proposed 2013 Streetscape Design & Implementation Plan. j) Provincial Policy Statement 2014: The Provincial Policy Statement provides direction on land use planning and development, and the transportation system. Relevant land use and transportation policies to the development of the Town’s Master Transportation Study include: x Section 1.6.7.1: Safe, energy efficient, transportation systems that move people and goods and address projected needs; x Section 1.6.7.2: Use of travel demand management strategies to maximize efficiency; x Section 1.6.7.3: A multimodal transportation system that provides connections within and among transportation systems and modes including across jurisdictional boundaries; General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, February 18, 2020 Item R3 Page 23 of 34 x Section 1.6.7.4: Land use patterns that minimize length and number of vehicle trips to support transit and active transportation; x Section 1.6.7.5: Integrate transportation and land use considerations at all stages of planning; x Section 1.6.8.2: Protect for major goods movement facilities and corridors; and, x Section 1.6.8.3: New development should be compatible with the long-term purposes of the corridor. k) Provincial Growth Plan 2019: The Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe was released on June 16, 2006, and is a long term plan that aims to: x Revitalize downtowns; x Create complete communities; x Provide housing options to meet the needs of people at any age; x Curb urban sprawl and protect farmland and green spaces; and, x Reduce traffic gridlock by improving access to a greater range of transportation options. l) Metrolinx Barrie Rail Corridor Expansion: The Barrie Rail Corridor Expansion project seeks to improve service on the Barrie GO line as described earlier and includes construction of a second track, improvements to existing facilities, and a new layover facility. m) Metrolinx Wellington Street Grade Separation: As the Regional Express Rail program advances and there are increases in rail and road traffic, several existing level crossings are expected to require grade separation. Metrolinx also maintains a policy of not creating any new level crossings on its corridors and opting for grade separation if a new crossing is required. Of the ten proposed grade separation projects identified, the Wellington Street East grade separation is one of two priority crossings on the Barrie rail corridor, subject to further detailed studies, discussions with municipal stakeholders, and funding availability. General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, February 18, 2020 Item R3 Page 24 of 34 n) Metrolinx 2016 GO Rail Station Access Plan: In support of the Regional Express Rail program, Metrolinx had developed the 2016 GO Rail Station Access Plan, which identify strategies to support expected ridership growth to 2031, to improve access and increase multi-modal station access and to manage demand for new parking. o) Highway 404 Class Environmental Assessment and Preliminary Design Study: In 2016, a Preliminary Design and Class Environmental Assessment Study was completed for 26 kilometres of Highway 404 from 407 Express Toll Route northerly to Green Lane in the Town of East Gwillimbury. This section of Highway 404 passes through six municipalities including the Town of Aurora. Highway 404 through the Town is currently six lanes wide to the south of Wellington Street and four lanes wide to the north. The Class Environmental Assessment Study recommends widening Highway 404 to include the addition of one High Occupancy Vehicle lane in the northbound and southbound directions. General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, February 18, 2020 Item R3 Page 25 of 34 a) Alternative No. 1 – Do Nothing: Beyond the planned Regional improvements, this alternative assumes that the Town will not invest in any additional transportation programs or infrastructure improvements to the year 2041. Given the traffic congestion issues identified, Alternative No. 1 is not recommended. b) Alternative No. 2 – TDM, Transit, and Active Transportation Improvements: This alternative proposes that the Town continue to work in partnership with York Region, SmartCommute Central York, Metrolinx, and the development industry to implement Travel Demand Management (TDM) policies and programs that encourage non-automobile travel to and from key destinations within and surrounding the Town. Based on Provincial and Regional directions to encourage transit oriented development and sustainable travel, as well as the Town’s own Strategic Plan, Alternative No. 2 is recommended. c) Alternative No. 3 – Operational Improvements: Operational improvements may take the form of traffic signal timing adjustments, traffic lane changes, safety improvements, parking modifications and sidewalk network improvements. On the basis that these have little impact to the existing built form of the Town with the ability to provide significant operational benefits, Alternative No. 3 is recommended. d) Alternative No. 4 – Road Capacity Improvements: Road capacity improvements involve vehicular traffic lane widenings. While there are some localized congestion hotspots, major roadworks associated with vehicular lane widenings on Regional roads within the Town are not recommended at this time. Since roadway capacity are generally within the moderate congestion zone, it is recommended that mitigation through TDM and operational improvements be considered a first priority without investing heavily into infrastructure improvements. As such, Alternative No. 4 is not recommended. Attachment 3 List of Alternative Solutions General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, February 18, 2020 Item R3 Page 26 of 34 Orchard Heights Blvd Mark St AuroraH ei ght sDr Mosley St Church St Kennedy St E Kennedy St W Cousins Dr Dunning Ave Golf L inks D r Edward StMurray Dr Allaura Blvd Henderson Dr YONGE STREET YONGESTREETYONGE STREETA B C D E F G H I WELLINGTON STREET EWELLINGTON STREET W Railway/GO Transit LineBatson Dr Seaton DrJTamarac Tr HENDERSON DRIVE Map created by the Town of Aurora Planning and Development Services Department, January 27th, 2020. Base data provided by York Region and Aurora - GIS. This is not a legal survey. 0 200 400 Metres SUBJECT LOCATION MAP TOP TEN INTERSECTIONS WITH HIGHEST NUMBER OF COLLISIONS PDS20-015 Attachment #4 A – Yonge Street and Orchard Heights Boulevard/Batson Drive B – Yonge Street and Aurora Heights Drive/Mark Street C – Yonge Street and Mosley Street D – Yonge Street and Church Street E – Yonge Street and Kennedy Street W/Kennedy Street E F – Yonge Street and Cousins Drive G – Yonge Street and Golf Links Drive/Dunning Avenue H – Yonge Street and Murray Drive/Edward Street I – Yonge Street and Henderson Drive/Allaura Boulevard J – Henderson Drive and Seaton Drive/Tamarac Trail Top Ten Intersections with Highest Number of Collisions General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, February 18, 2020 Item R3 Page 27 of 34 Road Diet Concept: from four lanes cross-section (‘Before’) to three lanes cross-section (‘After’)Attachment 5Road Diet ConceptGeneral Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, February 18, 2020 Item R3 Page 28 of 34 East-West Direction North-South Direciton Attachment 6 Conceptual Sightlines Analysis General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, February 18, 2020 Item R3 Page 29 of 34 Map created by the Town of Aurora Planning and Development Services Department, December 20th, 2019.Air photos taken Spring 2018 © First Base Solutions Inc., 2018 Orthophotography. Base data provided by York Region and Aurora - GIS. This is not a legal survey.3266,%/($'',7,21$/3$5.,1*$5($)25$8525$*267$7,210$67(575$163257$7,21678'<83'$7(),1$/5(3257PDS20-0$77$&+0(17General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, February 18, 2020 Item R3 Page 30 of 34 STREET NAME REVISED PROPOSED YEAR OF CONSTRUCTION 2020 HIGH 2024 MEDIUM 2026 LOW Sidewalk Constructi on Not Approved by Council Adair Drive * Bailey Crescent * Baldwin Road * Bathurst Street 99 Bayview Avenue 99 Berczy Street 99 Collins Crescent 99 Corbett Crescent 99 Davidson Road * Duncton Wood Crescent 99 Harriman Road * Henderson Drive * Hillview Road 99 Holman Crescent * Hutchinson Road 99 Industrial Parkway North 9 Industrial Parkway South (Yonge St. – Engelhard Dr.) 9 Industry Street 9 Johnson Road * Kitimat Crescent 99 Knowles Crescent 99 Limeridge Street 99 Morning Crescent 99 Patrick Drive 99 St. John's Sideroad West 99 Stoddart Drive 99 Webster Drive 99 Wellington Street West 99 Woodland Hills Boulevard 9 Yonge Street 9 9 Current proposed construction 9Revised from current proposed construction 99High Priority 99Medium Priority 99Low Priority *Construction Not Approved by Council Attachment 8 Recommended Sidewalk Construction Plan General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, February 18, 2020 Item R3 Page 31 of 34 a) Bicycle Lanes: Bicycle lanes are on-road facilities designated by pavement markings and signage. Bicycle lanes are typically on the right side of the street between the vehicle travel lane and curb or parking lane, and flow in the same direction of traffic. Buffered bicycle lanes offer an enhancement by using painted buffers to provide additional space between motor vehicles and cyclists. Example of a Bicycle Lanes is illustrated in Figure 1 Figure 1: Example of Bicycle Lanes b) Shared Lane Markings (Sharrows):sharrows are road markings that indicate a shared lane for bicycles and vehicles. It is a pavement marking that indicates a variety of uses to support a complete bikeway network; however, it is not a facility type. Sharrows are typically implemented to reinforce the legitimacy of bicycle traffic on the street, recommend proper bicyclist positioning, and maybe configured to offer directional wayfinding guidance. They should not be considered a substitute for bike lanes, cycle tracks, or multi-use trails where these types of facilities are a warranted or space permits. Example of a Sharrows is illustrated in Figure 2 Attachment 9 List of Cycling Facility Types General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, February 18, 2020 Item R3 Page 32 of 34 Figure 2: Example of Sharrows c) Urban Shoulder:an urban shoulder is a space, delineated by an edge line that a cyclist may ride in instead of riding in the vehicular shared lane where dedicated cycling facilities are not provided. An urban shoulder is not an alternative to a dedicated cycling facility and may be used for snow storage in the winter. Based on the City of Toronto Road Engineering Design Guidelines, the minimum width of an urban shoulder delineated by an edge line shall be 1.2m and may be as wide as 2.3m where space is available. Example of an Urban Shoulder is illustrated in Figure 3 Figure 3: Example of Urban Shoulder General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, February 18, 2020 Item R3 Page 33 of 34 Town of Aurora | Master Transportation Study Cycling Facilities hdrinc.com 100 York Boulevard, Suite 300, Richmond Hill, ON, CA L4B 1J8 (289) 695-4600121 Figure 9-1: Recommended Cycling Facilities$WWDFKPHQW5HFRPPHQGHG&\FOLQJ1HWZRUNGeneral Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, February 18, 2020 Item R3 Page 34 of 34 Town of Aurora General Committee Report No. CMS20-006 Subject: Tennis/Pickle ball Court Permits Prepared by: John Firman, Manager, Business Support Department: Community Services Date: February 18, 2020 Recommendation 1. That Report No. CMS20-006 be received; and 2. That the revised Policy No. CORP-10-Sports Field and Park Use Policy be approved as presented; and 3. That the costs for new signage be funded from the Council operating budget contingency. Executive Summary This report recommends changes to the permitting of tennis/pickle ball courts to help ensure maximum public drop-in access, while providing for occasional permitting for those users who require the security of a confirmed court time for programming. Considerations include: • Concerns have been raised regarding the inappropriate use of tennis courts by individuals who falsely claim to have a permit • The current 45 minute rule for playing time is difficult to enforce • Although there is limited need for permitting of tennis/pickle ball courts, some users do require the ability to guaranteed access at specific times • Changes in Town programming have resulted in new requests • Permit requests can be accommodated at a single location • Public access can be maintained at all times • Staff recommend the following changes to the Sports Field and Parks Use Policy Background Council, at its meeting of January 28, 2020 directed staff to report back to Council with recommendations regarding the restriction of tennis court permitting. General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, February 18, 2020 Item R4 Page 1 of 22 February 18, 2020 Page 2 of 6 Report No. CMS20-006 Although staff have not received complaints regarding the legitimate use of tennis/pickle ball courts where permits have been issued, there have been some incidents in which people that did not have a permit, falsely claimed that they did, and have refused to leave the court in accordance with posted playing time restrictions. While staff are not aware of any concerns regarding the use of pickle ball courts, most of the Town’s pickle ball courts are co-located and/or dual-lined with tennis courts, making it necessary to have the same permitting rules apply to both. Analysis Concerns have been raised regarding the inappropriate use of tennis courts by individuals who falsely claim to have a permit There have been complaints from residents that when they arrive at a tennis court they encounter a tennis instructor who is training players, stating that they have a permit. They refuse to show the permit and refuse to leave the court. If permitting were restricted and appropriate signage posted, all patrons would be aware that these claims are false. The current 45 minute rule for playing time is difficult to enforce The current rules of play posted at all Town tennis courts state that you must vacate the court after 45 minutes of play, to allow the next person onto the court. This rule is based on the honour system, and concerns have been raised that when someone arrives to play and the court is already in use, that the people using the court will claim that they just started. Regardless of how long they may have already been playing, they will utilize a full 45 minutes, when in fact they might have already been on the court for that long or more. This can create longer waiting times for other patrons. If this rule was changed to stipulate that court users must vacate the court every half-hour on the half-hour, that would ensure player turnover every 30 minutes, thereby reducing wait times. Although there is limited need for permitting of tennis/pickle ball courts, some users do require the ability to guaranteed access at specific times Historically, the Town has experienced minimal requests for tennis court bookings and to date we have not received any requests for pickle ball court bookings. The following table shows a three-year history: General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, February 18, 2020 Item R4 Page 2 of 22 February 18, 2020 Page 3 of 6 Report No. CMS20-006 Year # of Permit Requests Total Revenue 2017 5 users / 144 hours $936.00 2018 5 users / 116 hours $943.00 2019 5 users / 39 hours $334.33 In addition to coaches/organizations that request permits in order to secure scheduled training time, the following groups require the security of guaranteed access: • Schools: in order to ensure access for schedule physical education classes • Aurora Community Tennis Club: for overflow court time for tournament play Changes in Town programming have resulted in new requests For a number of years the Town has run a variety of tennis programs, including lessons and summer camps, but have discontinued all tennis program as of 2020. As a result, the service provider previously contracted to run the Town programs has elected to continue running these programs on their own, thereby substantially increasing the number of hours requested for tennis court permits in 2020. Staff have reviewed this request and previous similar requests, and are confident that in most cases only one court will be needed, but in some cases a second court will be needed in order to make the camp/program viable. It is also possible that the Town may resume tennis programming in future years and/or include tennis within other existing programming. Therefore, it is important to provide an exemption to any permitting restrictions for Town programming. Permit requests can be accommodated at a single location Given the limited number of permit requests received, it is anticipated that all tennis court permit requests can be accommodated at a single location. Fleury Park is the largest facility, with four (4) tennis courts, and has historically been the location for most Town tennis programs. The community is accustomed to having these courts booked for Town programming and therefore do not typically have an expectation of court availability at this location. Implementing a maximum of two courts to be permitted at any given time will enable permit holders running camps, community programs or tournaments the ability to manage more than one game simultaneously, while always ensuring a minimum of two courts being available to the public. General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, February 18, 2020 Item R4 Page 3 of 22 February 18, 2020 Page 4 of 6 Report No. CMS20-006 As this location would not address any potential future pickle ball permit requests, it is recommended that Thomas Coates Park be identified as a location for pickle ball permit requests. Thomas Coates Park currently has two (2) tennis-specific courts and two (2) pickle ball-specific courts, whereas most other pickle ball courts are also tennis courts, with the courts being lined for both forms of play. Permitting a maximum of one (1) pickle ball at this location would not impact tennis court users and would still ensure at least one (1) pickle ball court is always available to the public. Public access can be maintained at all times By limiting court bookings to a maximum of one (1) pickle ball court at Thomas Coates Park and a maximum of two (2) tennis courts at Fleury Park, this ensures that the public will always have drop-in access at any time. This is the current practice at all Town tennis and/or pickle ball courts. Staff recommend the following changes to the Sports Field and Parks Use Policy To address the issues outlined above, the summarized recommended changes to the Sports Field and Parks Use Policy are: • Tennis court permitting is prohibited at all locations, with the exception of Fleury Park • Pickle ball court permitting is prohibited at all locations, with the exception of Thomas Coates Park • Permits will be limited to a maximum of two (2) courts at Fleury Park (tennis) and a maximum of one (1) court at Thomas Coates Park (pickle ball) • Town of Aurora programs will be exempt from these restrictions • That the Aurora Community Tennis Club and schools in Aurora will be exempt from these restrictions • That the current time limit of drop-in play at all tennis and/or pickle ball courts be reduced from 45 minutes to 30 minutes, with a mandatory requirement that the court(s) be vacated every half hour, on the half hour to allow the next person(s) in line to play Implementing these changes will require the replacement of signage at all tennis/pickle ball courts. This signage replacement was not anticipated in the preparation of the 2020 Operating Budget and therefore these costs are not currently funded. General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, February 18, 2020 Item R4 Page 4 of 22 February 18, 2020 Page 5 of 6 Report No. CMS20-006 Advisory Committee Review Not applicable Legal Considerations The Aurora Community Tennis Club (ACTC) currently receives an annual permit for exclusive use of the McMahon Park Tennis courts, with limited public access. Staff recommends that ACTC and the annual McMahon Park permit be exempted from the proposed restrictions. Financial Implications The estimated costs for replacing the signage at all tennis and pickle ball courts is approximately $2,000. As these funds were not previously budgeted for in the 2020 operating budget, staff recommend that this cost be funded from the Council operating budget contingency. The total value of the approved Council operating budget contingency for 2020 is $10,000; of this approximately $400 has been committed to date. Communications Considerations Based on the IAP2 (International Association of Public Participation) Spectrum and the Town of Aurora Community Engagement Framework, the Town of Aurora will utilize the following level of engagement: Inform Consult Involve Collaborate Empower X The Town will inform the community of changes to the permitting process through on-site signage and notices on the Town website. Link to Strategic Plan Ensuring public access to tennis and pickle ball courts supports the Strategic Plan goal of Supporting an exceptional quality of life for all in its accomplishment in satisfying requirements in the following key objective within this goal statement: Objective 4: Encouraging an active and healthy lifestyle General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, February 18, 2020 Item R4 Page 5 of 22 General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, February 18, 2020 Item R4 Page 6 of 22 1 Topic: Sports Field and Park Use Policy Affects: Town staff, individuals and user groups that permit Town facilities. Section: CORP Replaces: Sports Field and Park Use Policy 2010Sports Field and Park Use Policy 2017 Original Policy Date: March 2010 Revision Date: October 24, 2017February 28, 2020 Effective Date: October 24, 2017February 28, 2020 Proposed Revision Date: October, 2021February, 2024 Prepared By: Parks, Recreation and Cultural Services, Business SupportCommunity Services, Business Support Approval Authority: Council 1.0 Policy Statement To provide transparency and structure for user groups and individuals pertaining to the fair allotment and use of Town owned and/or operated sports fields, parks and other outdoor facilities. 2.0 Purpose To ensure consistency in the programming and ongoing use of the Town’s sports fields and parks inventory; both municipally owned and/or managed facilities. To ensure that the highest quality and safest parks and sports fields are maintained and available for all permitted user groups. To provide a framework and consistent approach to the ongoing and seasonal use of our parks and sports field facilities in a fair and equitable manner. To ensure that the Town’s investment in parks and sports field facilities is managed in the best interest of all users and the citizens of Aurora. Administrative Policies & Procedures Policy No. CORP-10 - Sports Field and Park Use Policy General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, February 18, 2020 Item R4 Page 7 of 22 Policy No. CORP-10 – Sports Field and Park Use Policy 2 To establish clear guidelines and communication between the Business Support Division, the Parks Operations Division, and the user group contact. To accommodate the needs of a growing municipality and the increased demands on our sports field facilities. To clearly define the rules of use and the departmental procedures in maintaining compliance. 3.0 Scope This policy applies to all facility permit holders and all individual and/or user groups requesting use of Town owned and/or operated parks, and sports fields, and other outdoor facilities,as well as Town staff responsible for the use and/or operation of these facilities. The Town of Aurora is fortunate to have a substantial inventory of parks and sports fields within the municipal boundaries of the Town. These facilities primarily consist of rectangular fields and ball diamonds; however there are a number of other facilities including, but not limited to tennis courts, basketball courts, etc. Common uses include soccer, baseball, softball, football, rugby, and lacrosse, tennis, and pickle ball, but may include any sport or activity for which the playing surface is suitable. . 4.0 Definitions Adult Organization: A group that does not meet the requirements to be classified as a “Youth” organization, and demonstrate a minimum of 50% participation from Aurora residents, or ratepayers in the Town of Aurora, to be deemed “Aurora Based”. Aurora Based: A group that demonstrates that it meets the minimum requirements for its age category (Adult or Youth), of participation from Aurora residents or ratepayers in the Town of Aurora. Class A, B, C, D and E Sports Fields: Identifies facility classification and schedule of use. Director: The Director of Parks, Recreation and CulturalCommunity Services or his/her designate or successor. Formatted: Left, Indent: Left: 1.25 cm, Space Before: 0 pt, Line spacing: single, Hyphenate, Tab stops: Not at 0 cm General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, February 18, 2020 Item R4 Page 8 of 22 Policy No. CORP-10 – Sports Field and Park Use Policy 3 Facility: Any Town owned and/or operated park or outdoor sports field, playing surface or other outdoor space. Permit Holder: Refers to the organization, group or individual to which a facility rental permit has been issued, including any and all participants, volunteers, guests and invitees of the permit holder and their participants, volunteers, guests and invitees. Representative Organization: An organization that does not meet the minimum participation required to be deemed Aurora Based, but is the only organization that offers a particular program to Aurora residents. Sports Field: Includes all ball diamonds, rectangular fields (soccer, football, etc.) and any other outdoor sports playing surface owned and/or operated by the Town of Aurora. Youth Organization: An organization that demonstrates that it has a minimum of 80% participation of youth aged 17 or younger, with a minimum of 70% participation from Aurora residents or ratepayers in the Town of Aurora, to be Aurora Based. 5.0 Allocation Procedures 5.0 5.1 Submission of Seasonal Requests All seasonal sports field requests shall be submitted in the format prescribed by the Facility Bookings Administrator, no later than October 15th of each year. 5.2 Grandfathering Grandfathering applies to seasonal permit holders only. All seasonal sports field permit holders will maintain their existing field times on an annual basis, until such time as the permit holder surrenders that time. The following allocation procedures apply only to new requests, time surrendered by an existing permit holder, or in the event that new facilities are made available. Exceptions may be made at the mutual agreement of an existing permit holder and the Director for the release of permitted time on a one-time basis to accommodate the needs of another organization or for fields re-allocated at the Formatted: Heading 3, Indent: Left: 0 cm General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, February 18, 2020 Item R4 Page 9 of 22 Policy No. CORP-10 – Sports Field and Park Use Policy 4 discretion of the Director. 5.3 Allocation Priority The following allocation priority will be utilized for all seasonal requests submitted in accordance with seasonal permitting request procedures. In all other cases, field permits will be issued on a first come first serve basis with the established priority ranking applied when deemed necessary by the Director. The Town currently recognizes the following Aurora based and representative group community sports organizations: Aurora Based Youth Organizations Aurora Barbarians Rugby Aurora Diggers Girls Softball Aurora King Baseball Association Aurora Youth Soccer Club Total Tennis Aurora Based Adult Organizations Aurora Ladies Soft Ball Association Aurora Men’s Slo-Pitch Aurora Mixed Slo-Pitch Aurora Rovers Soccer Club Aurora Soccer Club Aurora Community Tennis Club Representative Groups - Youth Extreme Goalkeepers Redbirds Lacrosse York Region Football Association Representative Groups – Adult Valhalla Mixed Slo-Pitch Yonge Aurora Mixed Slo-Pitch Sports fields will be allocated in the following priority order: 1. Town of Aurora special events and recreation programming, including Formatted: Indent: Left: 0 cm General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, February 18, 2020 Item R4 Page 10 of 22 Policy No. CORP-10 – Sports Field and Park Use Policy 5 programming/events operated by third parties on behalf of the Town of Aurora 2. Recognized Aurora based youth organizations 3. Recognized representative youth organizations 4. Recognized Aurora based adult organizations 5. Recognized representative adult organizations 6. School groups 7. Other groups and private individuals Any organization requesting new field time and claiming either “Youth” or “Aurora Based” status shall be required to submit a participant list for the organization along with the request. The participant list shall be in the form of a letter signed by the president of the sports organization and submitted to the attention of the Facilities Booking Administrator outlining the total number of registered participants/members, including name, municipality of residency, and age (if requesting “Youth” status). 5.4 Artificial Turf Fields As the St. Maximillian Kolbe and Stewart Burnett artificial turf fields have been designed, in part, to support specific community programming, the following additional allocation priority will be applied: St. Maximillian Kolbe artificial turf field: First priority shall be given to all sports other than soccer, in accordance with seasonal booking procedures, and in accordance with the allocation priority listed in 5.3 of this policy. Once all non-soccer related sports have been accommodated, soccer requests will then be considered, in accordance with seasonal booking procedures, and in accordance with the allocation priority listed in 5.3 of this policy. Stewart Burnett Park artificial turf field: First priority shall be given to the Aurora Youth Soccer Club’s League 1 and Ontario Player Development League programming, in accordance with seasonal booking procedures, and in accordance with the allocation priority listed in 5.3 of this policy. Second priority shall be given to all other soccer requests, in accordance with seasonal booking procedures, and in accordance with the allocation General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, February 18, 2020 Item R4 Page 11 of 22 Policy No. CORP-10 – Sports Field and Park Use Policy 6 priority listed in 5.3 of this policy. Once all soccer related requests have been accommodated, non-soccer requests will then be considered, in accordance with seasonal booking procedures, and in accordance with the allocation priority listed in 5.2 of this policy. Sheppard’s Bush artificial turf field: Allocation of the Sheppard’s Bush artificial turf field shall be in accordance with 5.3 of this policy. 5.5 Special Circumstances Parks, Recreation and Cultural Services staff reserves the right to alter field allocation permits to accommodate play-off requirements, tournaments, and for other special circumstances as may be required. Any such alterations will be done on a one-time basis and the grandfathering rules shall apply. In the event that the re-allocation of field time is necessary, Parks, Recreation and Cultural Services staff will work with the affected permit holder to re-allocate field time in as fair a manner as possible and in an effort to minimize any impact. 6.0 Fees and Charges 6.1 User fees shall be applied in accordance with the current Town of Aurora Fees and Charges By-Law applicable at the time of booking. 6.2 User fees reflect the hourly rates charged and include the costs associated with facility lighting, ongoing facility maintenance and repair, including various supplies required to operate the facility. User fees do not include additional services required by user groups as outlined in 6.6 of this policy. 6.3 Prior to the issuance of a permit, individuals and user groups must provide to the Facility Bookings Administrator, the name, address, telephone number and email contact information of the individual to be named on the permit. This individual is responsible for all obligations of the Permit Holder in accordance with this policy. 6.4 Prior to the issuance of a permit the user group shall provide to the Facility Bookings Administrator, the name, address and telephone contact numbers Formatted: Indent: Left: 0 cm General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, February 18, 2020 Item R4 Page 12 of 22 Policy No. CORP-10 – Sports Field and Park Use Policy 7 of the primary contact person responsible for field bookings for the organization. This contact information will be used by the Town to notify the organization of all pertinent facility information concerning short term weather related field closings or other facility related information. 6.5 Changes or deletions and additions to any permit must be received by the person to whom the contract was issued, unless written authorization has been received by the Facility Bookings Administrator including a list of persons authorized to do so. 6.6 Weather related cancellations or facility closures due to unacceptable field condition in the opinion of the Manager of Parks Operations will not constitute cause for a refund of user fees for lost time experience by the permit holder. The Town will accept requests from the permit holder that have been impacted by a field closure to reschedule lost playing time at no additional cost to the affected group(s). For individual bookings that cannot be reasonably rescheduled due to the nature of the activity or availability of suitable facilities, refunds may be provided at the discretion of the directon. 6.7 The Facility Bookings Administrator must be notified in writing at least 14 days in advance of any facility use cancellations to be entitled to a 100% refund of the permit fees. Seasonal permits do not allow for individual date cancellations. No refunds shall be issued for cancellations with less than 14 days written notice. 6.8 Additional fees and/or security deposits will be applicable for special events, tournaments, and other special circumstances as determined the Director. Fees will be charged for the delivery and removal of picnic tables, waste containers, other equipment and additional park maintenance requirements associated with maintenance, restoration, garbage collection, and increased washroom maintenance during and after the special event/activity. The amount of these fees shall be based on the actual cost incurred by the Town, and in accordance with the Fees and Charges By-law existing at the time of the special event/activity. 6.8 Park use fees and/or security deposits will also apply to any organized event occurring in a park where, in the opinion of the Manager of Parks Operations, General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, February 18, 2020 Item R4 Page 13 of 22 Policy No. CORP-10 – Sports Field and Park Use Policy 8 the nature of the event poses a risk of damage to the park or facility or where the Town will incur additional expense associated with restoration and cleanup. 6.9 Additional fees may be applied where required in accordance with this policy. 6.10 All fees applied in accordance with this policy shall be in accordance with the current Fees and Charges By-law, and based on the actual cost incurred by the Town where applicable. 7.0 Facility Use Regulations 7.1 The season of play for all class A, B, C and D sports field facilities, as classified in Section 8.0 of this policy, shall commence on or about the 15th of May and continue through to September 30th, pending weather and field conditions. In order to conduct seasonal field maintenance operations, no facility permits will be issued prior to or after this period unless approved in writing by the Manager of Parks Operations. 7.2 The season of play for class E artificial turf fields, as classified in Section 8.0 of this policy, shall commence on or about April 1st and continue through to November 30th each year pending field conditions. Permits for class E fields will only be issued on a day to day basis for the periods of April 1st to April 15th and November 15th to 30th. 7.3 Permits may be issued for class E artificial turf fields, as classified in Section 8.0 of this policy, at other times, subject to the approval of the Manager of Parks Operations pending field conditions. 7.4 Should it be determined that there is unauthorized use of facilities during the off season or at any time without a permit the Town reserves the right to suspend or refuse renewal of the permit holder’s permits indefinitely. Upon confirmation of the unauthorized use of the facility the associate user group may be fined a financial penalty based on 10 times the normal hourly rental rate of the facility. The penalty shall be paid in full prior to the issuance of any further facility use permits or any resumption of use by the affected user group. 7.5 All recognized organizations in accordance with Section 5.3 of this policy will be issued a permit for the full amount of time that has been booked for the entire season of play. Payments are due not later than the 15th of General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, February 18, 2020 Item R4 Page 14 of 22 Policy No. CORP-10 – Sports Field and Park Use Policy 9 June. Selected permit holders may be issued monthly statements on the 1st of each month to each group and payments are due within 30 days of the issuance of each statement. Failure to remit payments on time may result in the cancellation of facility permits and or reallocation of facilities to other user groups at the discretion of the Director. 7.6 All permits must be signed and returned to the Facility Bookings Administrator prior to any facility usage. Failure to submit signed permit(s) will result in the group not being permitted to use the field. 7.7 All user groups shall submit a list of executives, if any, including contact information, on an annual basis, within seven days following the election/appointment of the executives follow the organization’s Annual General Meeting, or upon request of the Director. 7.8 Sub-leasing or booking of facilities by the permit holder to a third party will not be permitted under any circumstances. Any and all agreements to permanently or temporarily release permitted time to another user group shall be administered by the Facility Bookings Administrator, subject to the approval of the Director. No user group shall be permitted to use any facility without a permit being issued in that user groups name. 7.9 All permit holders shall remove from their permitted facility all garbage, refuse or debris from the immediate area of the sports fields. This includes but is not limited to; sidelines, dugouts, player areas and spectator areas. Failure to do so may result in the permit holder being invoiced for the Towns costs to clean up the affected area. No further permits will be issued to the offending permit holder until payment has been received by the Town. 7.10 Damages to the playing surface and/or other areas of the facility and restoration expenses incurred by the Town resulting from unauthorized use of the facility at any time will be assessed to the associated permit holder or to the affiliated organization of the permit holder. The amount of damages will be based on the time and materials required to repair the damages and any lost facility rental revenue resulting from the closing of the facility for repairs. All payments in relation to the above shall be paid in full prior to the permit holder’s further use of the facility or the re-issuance of facility use permits. 7.11 Each permit holder shall be responsible for shutting off of the facility lighting system immediately following use of the facility. Should the permit holder fail to ensure the system is shut off following the use of the facility the Town will General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, February 18, 2020 Item R4 Page 15 of 22 Policy No. CORP-10 – Sports Field and Park Use Policy 10 issue a formal notice of warning to the permit holder. Following a second occurrence the permit holder will be assessed a penalty of $250.00 based on electrical consumption and the Town’s administrative costs associated with attending the facility and shutting down the lighting system on behalf of the permit holder. 7.12 All required field maintenance will be provided in accordance with the Town’s service level maintenance standards, excluding the provision of labour and equipment required to prepare the playing surface of softball/baseball diamonds, e.g. infield lining, lining equipment, bases, and equipment storage box padlocks. 7.13 For softball/baseball diamonds, the Town will provide one (1) storage box with pad lock and one (1) key for the containment of line marking chalk and a sufficient supply of line marking chalk will be provided in each location required by the permit holder upon notification to the Facility Bookings Administrator. Extra keys may be obtained at the Parks Operations office. 7.14 Should the permit holder require equipment storage on site at any softball/baseball diamond, the permit holder will be required to purchase an equipment storage box from the Town. The Town will permit one (1) storage box per permit holder to be located at the facility of its choice. To order storage boxes, please contact the Parks Operations office. To ensure consistency, storage boxes must be purchased from the Town and the box must be fitted with a pad lock provided by the permit holder and remained locked at all times. Storage boxes found to be unlocked will be locked by the Town and the permit holder will be billed a minimum of $175.00 for the time required to secure the box and for the provision of a Town lock. Contact the Parks Operations office for further information and pricing of equipment storage boxes. 7.15 Tennis court permitting is prohibited at all locations, with the exception of Fleury Park. Pickle ball court permitting is prohibited at all locations, with the exception of Thomas Coates Park. Formatted: Condensed by 0.15 pt Formatted: List Paragraph, Outline numbered + Level: 2 + Numbering Style: 1, 2, 3, … + Start at: 15 + Alignment: Left + Aligned at: 1.9 cm + Indent at: 3.2 cm Formatted: Condensed by 0.15 pt Formatted: List Paragraph, Indent: Left: 3.2 cm, First line: 0 cm Formatted: List Paragraph, Outline numbered + Level: 2 + Numbering Style: 1, 2, 3, … + Start at: 15 + Alignment: Left + Aligned at: 1.9 cm + Indent at: 3.2 cm Formatted: Condensed by 0.15 pt General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, February 18, 2020 Item R4 Page 16 of 22 Policy No. CORP-10 – Sports Field and Park Use Policy 11 7.16 7.17 The following exemptions apply to sections 7.15, 7.16 and 8.3: • Programs operated by or on behalf of the Town of Aurora • Aurora Community Tennis Club • Schools in Aurora 7.18 Permits shall be limited to a maximum of two (2) tennis courts and one (1) pickle ball court at any given time. Drop-in play at all tennis and/or pickle ball courts shall be on a first-come- first-serve basis, with a mandatory requirement that the court(s) be vacated every half hour, on the half hour to allow the next person(s) in line to play. 7.19 8.0 Facility Classification and Schedule of Usage 8.1 Rectangular Fields Class “A” Senior Soccer Description: Full sized (11 v 11) Town owned and/or managed senior soccer pitch with lighting and irrigation. Locations: Fleury Park, Highland Park, Optimist Park Total: 3 Schedule: Permitted for use not more than five (5) days in a seven (7) day period with two (2) consecutive days of rest in a seven (7) day period throughout the playing season. Permitted for use for regularly scheduled games only and not more than two (2) games in a 24 hour period. Practise play is not permitted on any class “A” facility. Class “B” Senior Soccer Description: Full sized (11 v 11) Town owned and/or managed senior soccer pitch without lights. Formatted: List Paragraph, Outline numbered + Level: 2 + Numbering Style: 1, 2, 3, … + Start at: 15 + Alignment: Left + Aligned at: 1.9 cm + Indent at: 3.2 cm Formatted: Condensed by 0.15 pt Formatted: Left, Indent: Left: 1.27 cm, Space Before: 0 pt, Line spacing: single, No bullets or numbering, Hyphenate, Tab stops: Not at 0 cm + 8.88 cm Formatted: List Paragraph, Outline numbered + Level: 2 + Numbering Style: 1, 2, 3, … + Start at: 15 + Alignment: Left + Aligned at: 1.9 cm + Indent at: 3.2 cm Formatted: Left, Space Before: 0 pt, Line spacing: single, Bulleted + Level: 1 + Aligned at: 3.84 cm + Indent at: 4.47 cm, Hyphenate, Tab stops: Not at 0 cm + 8.88 cm Formatted: Condensed by 0.15 pt Formatted: List Paragraph, Outline numbered + Level: 2 + Numbering Style: 1, 2, 3, … + Start at: 15 + Alignment: Left + Aligned at: 1.9 cm + Indent at: 3.2 cm Formatted: List Paragraph, Indent: Left: 3.2 cm, First line: 0 cm Formatted: List Paragraph, Outline numbered + Level: 2 + Numbering Style: 1, 2, 3, … + Start at: 15 + Alignment: Left + Aligned at: 1.9 cm + Indent at: 3.2 cm Formatted: Condensed by 0.15 pt Formatted: List Paragraph, Space Before: 12 pt, Outline numbered + Level: 2 + Numbering Style: 1, 2, 3, … + Start at: 15 + Alignment: Left + Aligned at: 1.9 cm + Indent at: 3.2 cm, Tab stops: 8.88 cm, Centered Formatted: Indent: Left: 0 cm, First line: 0 cm General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, February 18, 2020 Item R4 Page 17 of 22 Policy No. CORP-10 – Sports Field and Park Use Policy 12 Locations: Summit Park, Craddock Park, Lambert Willson Park (Legion), Norm Weller Park, Machell Park, Confederation Park, Magna(2) Total: 8 Schedule: Permitted for use not more than six (6) days in a seven (7) day period with one (1) day of rest in a seven (7) day period throughout the playing season. Permitted for use for not more than one (1) game during a 24 hour period. Class “C” Mini Soccer Description: Medium sized (9 v 9 and 7 v 7) Town owned and/or managed soccer pitches. Locations (9 v 9): Sheppard’s Bush (3), Hamilton Park, Magna (2) Total: 6 Locations (7 v 7): Sheppard’s Bush (6), Harmon Park, Queen’s Diamond Jubilee Park, Hickson Park, Ada Johnson Park, Magna (2) Total: 12 Schedule: Permitted for seven (7) days per week for not more than two (2) games in a 24 hour period. Class “D” Micro Soccer Description: Small sized (5 v 5 and 3 v 3) Town owned and/or managed soccer pitches. Locations (5 v 5): Magna (10), other locations as may be temporarily approved Total: 10 Locations (3 v 3): McMahon Park (2), Town Park (2), Magna (3), other locations as may be temporarily approved Total: 7 Formatted: Indent: Left: 0 cm, First line: 0 cm General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, February 18, 2020 Item R4 Page 18 of 22 Policy No. CORP-10 – Sports Field and Park Use Policy 13 Schedule: Permitted for seven (7) days per week for not more than two (2) games in a 24 hour period. Class “E” Senior Field Description: Full sized Town owned and/or managed artificial turf sports field with lighting. Locations: Sheppard’s Bush, St. Maximillian Kolbe CHS, Stewart Burnett Park Total: 3 Schedule: Permitted for use seven (7) days per week between the hours of 7:00am to 11:00pm. 8.2 Softball/Baseball Diamonds Class “A” Baseball Description: Town owned and/or managed senior baseball facility with lighting and irrigation. Locations: Lambert Willson Park, Stewart Burnett Park Total: 2 Schedule: Permitted for use seven (7) days per week between the hours of 9:00am to 11:00pm. Class “A” Softball Description: Town owned and/or managed senior softball facility with lighting and irrigation. Locations: Town Park, Norm Weller Park, Fleury Park, Lambert Willson Park(3), James Lloyd Park, Optimist Park Total: 8 Schedule: Permitted for use seven (7) days per week between the hours of 9:00am to 11:00pm. Formatted: Indent: Left: 0 cm, First line: 0 cm General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, February 18, 2020 Item R4 Page 19 of 22 Policy No. CORP-10 – Sports Field and Park Use Policy 14 Class “B” Softball Description: Town owned and/or managed senior softball facility without lights. Locations: Copland Park Total: 1 Schedule: Permitted for use seven (7) days per week between the hours of 3:30pm to sundown. Class “C” Softball Description: Town owned and/or managed junior softball facility without lights. Locations: Confederation Park (2), Machell Park (2), Elizabeth Hader Park, Summit Park Total: 6 Schedule: Permitted for use seven (7) days per week between the hours of 3:30pm to sundown. 8.3 Tennis and Pickle Ball Courts Tennis Courts Description: Town owned and/or managed tennis courts lined for tennis only. Locations: David English Park (2), Fleury Park (4), Summit Park (2), Thomas Coates Park(2) Total: 10 Schedule: Fleury Park only, permitted for use seven (7) days per week between the hours of 9:00am to dusk, up to a maximum of two (2) courts. Tennis/Pickle Ball Courts Description: Town owned and/or managed tennis courts lined for both tennis and pickle ball. Locations: McMahon Park (3), Norm Weller Park (2) Formatted: Font: Bold Formatted: Indent: Left: 1.25 cm, Hanging: 2.56 cm Formatted: Underline General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, February 18, 2020 Item R4 Page 20 of 22 Policy No. CORP-10 – Sports Field and Park Use Policy 15 Total: 5 Schedule: McMahon Park only, permitted under separate agreement to the Aurora Community Tennis Club. Pickle Ball Courts Description: Town owned and/or managed pickle ball courts lined for pickle ball only. Locations: Thomas Coates Park (2), Trent Park (2) Total: 4 Schedule: Thomas Coates Park only, permitted for use seven (7) days per week between the hours of 9:00am to dusk, to a maximum of one (1) court. 8.4 For tournaments and special events that have been approved by the Manager of Parks Operations field use limitations outlined in 8.1 and 8.2 may be waived. 8.45 All Class “A” and “E” sports fields are subject to an 11:00pm curfew. Continued play beyond 11:00pm and/or use of the facility lighting system beyond 11:15pm will not be permitted without approval from the Director. 8.65 Notwithstanding 8.1 and 8.2, permit holders are advised that regularly scheduled maintenance is conducted on a routine basis, and such routine maintenance may be cancelled or delayed should the facility be in use at the time of scheduled maintenance. 8.67 All classes of facilities will be scheduled for organized use by the Town of Aurora’s Facility Bookings Administrators based on the Town’s facility allocation criteria and upon receipt of the user groups written facility permit request. 9.0 Regulatory/References/Codes/Standards Formatted: Underline Formatted: Indent: Left: 1.25 cm, Hanging: 2.56 cm Formatted: Justified, Indent: Left: 1.25 cm, Hanging: 1.29 cm, Space Before: 12 pt, Line spacing: Multiple 1.15 li, Don't hyphenate, Tab stops: 0 cm, Left General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, February 18, 2020 Item R4 Page 21 of 22 Policy No. CORP-10 – Sports Field and Park Use Policy 16 Other regulations, policies and procedures applicable to sports fields and park permits, include but are not limited to: • Parks By-law • Fees and Charges By-law • Municipal Alcohol Policy • Third Party Events in Outdoor Town Facilities Policy • Health Protection and Promotion Act • Liquor Licence Act • Liquor Control Act • Gaming Control Act General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, February 18, 2020 Item R4 Page 22 of 22 Town of Aurora General Committee Report No. FIN20-003 Subject: Development Charge Deferral for Major Office Space Prepared by: Julie Tian, Specialist, Accounting Department: Finance Date: February 18, 2020 Recommendation 1. That Report No. FIN20-003 be received; and 2. That staff proceed with the development of a policy for the deferral of Development Charges for Major Office Space. Executive Summary To provide an overview of Council’s motion for a development charge incentive for Major Office Space and its departmental implications. • A development charge deferral will achieve the same objective as an exemption at a lower administrative cost to the Town. • A policy is preferred to a by-law amendment as it is more flexible, administratively efficient, and can be done at a lower cost to the Town. • A key component of the proposed deferral policy is a requirement that a deferral agreement be entered into between the Town and the Applicant for each development. Background On November 12, 2019, the Council approved a motion which outlined the following required action: 1. That staff bring forward a by-law amendment to the Development Charges By-law to exempt the Town of Aurora’s portion of development charges for “Major Office Developments”, which is defined by Council as a free standing building with a minimum height of three above-ground storeys and a minimum gross floor area of 75,000 square feet; and General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, February 18, 2020 Item R5 Page 1 of 6 February 18, 2020 Page 2 of 6 Report No. FIN20-003 2. That the ability to take advantage of the exemption would begin at Council approval and end three years later; and 3. That the total eligible gross floor area to be considered for the exemption be capped at 300,000 square feet per development. York Region Council approved a three-year pilot policy providing long-term development charge deferral to qualified office developments. The Region’s policy requires local participation and can be used in conjunction with municipal policies. Staff recommend that in the place of an exemption of development charges through a Development Charges By-law amendment, a policy offering a deferral of development charges be implemented instead. Analysis A deferral of development charges will achieve the same objective as an exemption at a lower cost to the Town Staff has reviewed Council’s Motion to exempt development charges (DCs) and alternatively recommend that the Town’s share of DCs for Major Office Developments, as defined by Council, be deferred in full until such time that the intended use of the property changes. Under a deferral, DCs will not be collectable as long as the use of the development remains under Office use. If the Town proceeds with an exemption of DCs, it would be subject to additional mandatory requirements of the Development Charges Act. These requirements include the need to identify equivalent replacement revenue from alternative funding sources, an amendment to the current Development Charges By-law, and Council’s review of the amendment, all of which results in a higher administrative and financial cost to the Town. The Development Charges Act requires exempted DCs to be replaced over time with alternative (non-DC) sources of funding, which must be specified in a DC By-law amendment. These funding sources could include tax levy, user rates or other non-DC funded reserves. Additionally, the Town will be exposed to the risk of a future change of use of the office development where DCs remain exempted but economic benefits are no longer brought to the community. The recommended option is to offer a deferral of the Town’s DCs for Major Office Developments until such time there is a change of the use of the applicable development. The owner of the development at the time of the change of use will be subject to DCs General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, February 18, 2020 Item R5 Page 2 of 6 February 18, 2020 Page 3 of 6 Report No. FIN20-003 calculated using the rates for the new use category of the development at the prevailing rate at that time. The DC deferral is an equal incentive to a DC exemption for office developments while encouraging that the development sustains benefit to the community. Benefits of a deferral arrangement: • The Town is not required to amend the DC by-law, which requires additional mandatory procedures and costs; • The Town is not required to identify equivalent alternative funding to replace deferred DC revenues resulting from the arrangement; • The developer is discouraged from changing the building’s use to a non-office purpose; • The Town has previous experience in the administration of DC deferral agreements. A policy is preferred to a by-law amendment as it is more flexible, administratively efficient, and can be done at a lower cost to the Town. Since this incentive opportunity is planned for a limited time period, and can be revoked at any time, a policy is preferred to a DC By-law amendment as it offers more flexibility. The Town will need to make multiple amendments to the DC By-law in response to the legislative changes in the Development Charges Act in late 2020, and mandatory By-law update in 2024. An amendment to include this exemption would require additional amendments in early 2020. The Development Charges Act requires a background study and public meeting for amendments made to the By-law. Therefore, an amendment to the DC By-law would result in significantly higher administrative cost for the Town in terms of time from Council and Staff, and the need to engage an external consultant. A key component of the proposed Office Space Development Charge Deferral Policy is a requirement that an agreement be entered into between the Town and the developer Applicants must enter into a Development Charges Deferral Agreement with the Town within the effective period of the policy (three years following CAO approval). The deferral agreement is entered into at the time of the execution of the site plan agreements to ensure sufficient approvals are in place. Site plan applications submitted before the effective period of the policy will not be eligible to enter into a Development Charges Deferral Agreement. General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, February 18, 2020 Item R5 Page 3 of 6 February 18, 2020 Page 4 of 6 Report No. FIN20-003 Building permit(s) related to the proposed development must be issued within 5 years of the execution of the deferral agreement, otherwise the DCs will become payable at the prevailing rate at the time of building permit issuance. This is to ensure applicants will follow through on their proposed developments and contribute to the Town’s economic growth. Upon a change of use of the property from office use, the owner at the time will be required to pay applicable DCs for the new category in accordance with the effective rates at the time of the building permit issuance for the change of use. Since the Town will recover DCs at the prevailing rate of the new category at the time of the change of use, there is no need to charge interests on the deferred DC amount. Advisory Committee Review Not applicable Legal Considerations To amend the Development Charges By-law, the process under the Development Charges Act must be followed. This requires the Town to prepare a Background Study and hold a public meeting. Further, once the amendment to the by-law is passed, a person/corporation would have the right to appeal it. The administrative and legal costs arising from the drafting and preparation of deferral agreements may be recovered through a legal fee. A deferral of DCs is permitted under Section 27 of the Development Charges Act and does not require an amendment to the by-law. Financial Implications A DC deferral has no financial implications on non-DC funding sources. DC deferrals do have a short-term financial impact as the revenues are collected over a longer period of time; however, there is no long-term financial impact on DC revenues. Deferred DC revenues will be collected when there is a change of use of the property or through future DC by-laws. The Town will not collect interest during the deferral period, since DCs will be collected at the prevailing rate at the time it becomes collectable. The estimated DCs deferred is expected to range from $338,980 (75,000 square feet) to $1,355,920 (300,000 square feet) per development. General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, February 18, 2020 Item R5 Page 4 of 6 February 18, 2020 Page 5 of 6 Report No. FIN20-003 Communications Considerations The Town will inform all stakeholders by providing notice on the availability and requirements of the deferral on the Town website. The Town will effectively communicate the goal of this policy and its link to the Town’s strategic plan to the public. Link to Strategic Plan Goal #1 of the Town’s Economic Development Strategic Plan is Targeting Growth Sectors and Attracting New Investment. Class A office developments will help encourage employment, job creation, and provide long-term economic sustainability for the community. Alternative(s) to the Recommendation 1. Amendment to the Development Charges By-law specifying an exemption of DCs. Conclusions A Development Charge Deferral for Major Office Space Policy will provide a clear and consistent framework for the application and administration of development charge deferrals of this nature. It will accomplish the following: • Offer an incentive for new investments that is equivalent to an exemption and in alignment with the Strategic Plan; • Result in lower financial and administrative costs for the Town and; • Improve tracking and consistency through standardized deferral agreements. Attachments None General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, February 18, 2020 Item R5 Page 5 of 6 General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, February 18, 2020 Item R5 Page 6 of 6 Town of Aurora General Committee Report No. PDS20-013 Subject: Application for a Zoning By-law Amendment Morgan Planning 2 Willow Farm Lane File Number: ZBA-2019-02 Prepared by: Sean Lapenna, Planner Department: Planning and Development Services Date: February 18, 2020 Recommendations 1. That Report No. PDS20-013 be received; 2. That Zoning By-law Amendment application File Number ZBA-2019-02 to rezone a portion of the subject lands from ‘ER - Estate Residential Exception Zone (73)’ to ‘R2 - Detached Second Density Residential Exception Zone (74)’ be approved; 3. That water and sewage capacity for 3 persons, equivalent to servicing 1 single detached unit, be allocated to the future severed lot; and, 4. That the Zoning By-law Amendment be presented at a future Council Meeting. Executive Summary The proposed Zoning By-law Amendment (ZBA) seeks to rezone a portion of the property from ‘ER - Estate Residential Exception Zone (73)’ to ‘R2 - Detached Second Density Residential Exception Zone (74)’. • The proposed Zoning By-law amendment is consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement, Places to Grow Plan, Lake Simcoe Protection Plan and York Region Official Plan. • The proposed Zoning By-law amendment is consistent with the Official Plan and compatible with the host community. • The proposed Zoning By-law amendment is appropriate and compatible. • A future consent application will be required. General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, February 18, 2020 Item R6 Page 1 of 17 February 18, 2020 Page 2 of 11 Report No. PDS20-013 • Planning Staff recommend that the subject Zoning By-law amendment application be approved. Background Application History The subject application was submitted on June 18, 2019. An Information Report was presented at the Public Planning Meeting in September 2019. Council passed the following resolution: 1. That Report No. PDS19-082 be received; and, 2. That comments presented at the Public Planning meeting be addressed by Planning and Development Services in a report to a future General Committee meeting. Location / Land Use The subject lands are currently comprised of a single parcel and is municipally recognized as 2 Willow Farm Lane. The property is located on the south-west corner of St. John’s Sideroad West and Willow Farm Lane (See Figure 1). The subject property has a total lot area of 10,102.77 m² (108,745 ft ²) and is a corner lot with 100.05 m (328 ft) of frontage on St. John’s Sideroad West and 43.41 m frontage (142 ft) onto Willow Farm Lane (See Figure 5). The property currently contains a Single-Detached Dwelling, along with an outdoor pool. The site is currently accessed off Willow Farm Lane. Surrounding Land Uses The surrounding uses adjacent to the subject lands generally consist of single detached homes and vacant lands. The following summarizes the surrounding uses: North: St. John’s Sideroad West and existing estate residential homes; South: Existing residential subdivision and St. Andrew’s College; East: Open space, environmentally protected lands & a GO rail corridor; West: Existing residential subdivision. General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, February 18, 2020 Item R6 Page 2 of 17 February 18, 2020 Page 3 of 11 Report No. PDS20-013 Policy Context Provincial Policies All Planning Act development applications are subject to Provincial policy. The Provincial Policy Statement (PPS) provides policy direction on matters of Provincial interest. These policies support the development of strong communities through the promotion of efficient land use and development patterns. The Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe is a guiding document for growth management within the Greater Golden Horseshoe (GGH) Area to 2041. The Growth Plan provides a framework which guides decisions on how land will be planned, designated, zoned and designed. The subject lands are located outside of the Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Plan area so as such, are not subject to conformity with the Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Plan. York Region Official Plan (YROP) The subject lands are designated as ‘Urban Area’ within the York Region Official Plan. York Region’s vision for the Urban Area is to strategically focus growth while conserving resources and to create sustainable, liveable communities. Under York Region’s Official Plan, one regional urbanization goal is to enhance the Region’s urban structure through city building, intensification and compact, complete communities. Town of Aurora Official Plan (OP) Two separate Official Plan designations apply to the subject lands. The majority of the lands are designated ‘Estate Residential’ while a smaller portion of the lands (towards the northeast of the property) are designated ‘Stable Neighbourhoods’ (See Figure 2). [This is the general area subject to the rezoning application]. Permitted uses in Estate Residential areas are limited to detached dwellings, accessory dwellings and home occupations. To ensure the highest standards of development for these extremely low density residential uses, Estate Residential density lots require a minimum lot area of 0.2 net residential hectares (or 0.5 acres) per unit. This would equate into a lot area of 2,000 m². The intent of the ‘Stable Neighbourhoods’ designation is to ensure that all new development will be protected from incompatible forms of development and, at the same General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, February 18, 2020 Item R6 Page 3 of 17 February 18, 2020 Page 4 of 11 Report No. PDS20-013 time, are permitted to evolve and be enhanced over time. Section 8.1.2 of the Town’s Official Plan lists ‘Ground-Related Residential Uses’ as permitted within Stable Neighbourhood areas. Town of Aurora Zoning By-law #6000-17 The subject lands are currently zoned ‘ER - Estate Residential Exception Zone (73)’ under By-law 6000-17 (See Figure 3). This zoning primarily allows for Detached Dwellings, Second Suites and Home Occupations. The site specific zoning exception number in place requires a minimum lot area of 4,000 m² (43,056 ft ²) as well as a minimum lot frontage of 34 m (112 ft). Reports and Studies The applicant submitted the following documents as part of a complete application: Table 1: Reports and Studies Report Name Report Author Planning Justification Report Morgan Planning Draft Zoning By-law Amendment Morgan Planning Severeance Sketch E.R. Garden Limited Building Elevations Rick Brown & Associates Inc. Proposed Application The proposed Zoning By-law Amen dment (ZBA) seeks to rezone a portion of the property from ‘ER - Estate Residential Exception Zone (73)’ to ‘R2 - Detached Second Density Residential Exception Zone (74)’. The proposed Zoning By-law Amendment is being requested to facilitate a future land severance at the property to create one (1) additional single-detached lot, in addition to keeping the existing Estate Residential dwelling on the lot to be retained (See Figure 5). The newly created lot would accommodate a new Single-Detached Dwelling with access to Willow Farm Lane (See Figure 5). General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, February 18, 2020 Item R6 Page 4 of 17 February 18, 2020 Page 5 of 11 Report No. PDS20-013 The size of the new lot area for the severed portion would no longer be considered Estate Residential thereby requiring a Zoning By-law amendment. Analysis Planning Considerations The proposed Zoning By-law Amendment Application is consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement, Places to Grow Plan, Lake Simcoe Protection Plan and the York Region Official Plan. The proposed Zoning By-law amendment would provide an opportunity to accommodate one additional Single-Detached lot, which contributes to the PPS objective of ensuring the provision of sufficient housing to meet changing needs. Places to Grow promotes and encourages new growth in built up areas of a community through intensification. The proposed Zoning By-law amendment would accommodate future population growth in Aurora by adding to the Town’s housing supply where capacity exists to accommodate expected population growth. The Lake Simcoe Conservation Authority (LSRCA) reviewed the submitted materials in the context of the Lake Simcoe Protection Plan (LSPP) and have no objection to approval of the Planning application. The subject lands are designated ‘Urban Area’ in the York Region Official Plan. The Urban Areas are the focus of growth within York Region, with a full range of residential, commercial, industrial and institutional uses permitted. Town of Aurora Official Plan The proposed Zoning By-law Amendment is consistent with the Official Plan. As noted above, the area subject to the proposed re-zoning and subsequent future land severance is designated ‘Stable Neighbourhoods’ by the Official Plan (See Figure 2). Ground-related residential uses are a permitted form of housing, and all new development within the ‘Stable Neighbourhoods’ designation shall respect and reinforce the existing physical character and uses of the surrounding area. General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, February 18, 2020 Item R6 Page 5 of 17 February 18, 2020 Page 6 of 11 Report No. PDS20-013 The Official Plan requires new development and site alterations to be sympathetic to the form and character of abutting existing residential development and to be compatible with regard to building scale and urban design. The proposed Site Plan concept demonstrates that the newly proposed Single- Detached Dwelling would be developed on the portion of the property designated as ‘Stable Neighbourhoods’ while a remnant portion of the newly created lot would still be designated ‘Estate Residential’. Although the new lot itself will be further reviewed and evaluated through a future consent application, staff are of the opinion that the configuration of the future parcel demonstrated through planning’s review for the Zoning By-law amendment will be compatible with the existing lot pattern of the surrounding area to the east and south. Finally, with the new dwelling proposed to be developed on the ‘Stable Neigbourhoods’ designation, the general intent of the Official Plan is maintained. As such, staff are satisfied that the proposal conforms to the Official Plan. Zoning By-law 6000-17 The proposed Zoning By-law Amendment Application is appropriate and compatible. The R2 - Detached Second Density Residential Exception Zone (74) is a site specific zoning which already exists under Town of Aurora Zoning By-law #6000-17, as amended. Further to this, the R2 (74) zoning is consistent with the adjacent neighbouring properties to the south and east of 2 Willow Farm Lane. The following table lists the development standards for the proposed new lot intended to accommodate a new Dwelling, compared to the R2(74) zoning standards: Development Standard R2 (74) requirements By-law # 6000-17 Newly proposed Lot Minimum Lot Frontage 22.0 m 22.08 m Minimum Lot Area 950.0 m² 1,656.1 m² Minimum Exterior Side Yard 8.0 m 10.5 m Minimum Interior Side Yard 1.2 m 6.0 m Minimum Front Yard 8.0 m 17.1 m Minimum Rear Yard 9.0 m 15.4 m General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, February 18, 2020 Item R6 Page 6 of 17 February 18, 2020 Page 7 of 11 Report No. PDS20-013 Staff note that the current proposal conforms with the minimum R2 (74) standards. Staff also note that the re-zoning intended to accommodate one additional lot will not result in any zoning compliance issues for the retained lot which will continue to be zoned ‘ER - Estate Residential Exception Zone (73)’ It is Staff’s opinion that the proposed Zoning By-law amendment will result in no impacts to the existing character of the host community. A future consent application will be required. Planning Staff advise that a future consent application will be required to accommodate a future land severance, where the applicant will be required to submit all plans, drawings, documents and materials deemed necessary including but not limited to a site plan, grading plan, tree/landscaping plans, etc. The consent application will be circulated and reviewed in detail at this stage. In the event that a consent application approval is granted, the applicant will be subject to conditions of approval, in order to ensure appropriate development of the property. Staff advise that the development of a single family dwelling on the lot to be created is not subject to site plan approval in accordance with the Town’s Site Plan Control By-law. Department / Agency Comments Planning Staff recommend that the subject Zoning By-law amendment application be approved. The proposed Zoning By-Law Amendment Application was circulated to internal departments and external agencies for review and comment. All circulated agencies are satisfied with the application and have no further comments at this time. The following agencies provided additional comments: Planning and Development Services – Development Engineer The Development Engineer has no objection to the Zoning By-law amendment application. Final determination and design of access, grading and servicing should be at the detailed plan as part of the future consent application. General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, February 18, 2020 Item R6 Page 7 of 17 February 18, 2020 Page 8 of 11 Report No. PDS20-013 Building Division The Town’s Building Division has no objection to the Zoning By-law amendment application. The Town’s Building Division will be circulated on the future consent application to confirm compliance with all applicable Zoning By-law standards. Parks Division The Town’s Parks Division has no objection to the Zoning By-law amendment application. This Department however notes that vegetation management issues will need to be addressed through the future land severance application, specifically with respect to the Town’s Tree Removal/Pruning and Compensation Policy. Cash-In-Lieu of Parkland will be required for the new lot and will be part of the conditions of approval for the consent. Traffic Analyst The Town’s Traffic Analyst has no objection to the Zoning By-law amendment application but does note however that an acceptable driveway arrangement for the existing and proposed buildings must be explicitly illustrated in the future consent application. Regional Municipality of York York Region has no objection to the Zoning By-law amendment application and reiterates that the location and design of the entrance onto St. John’s Sideroad West will be to the satisfaction of the Region and will be reviewed as part of the subsequent consent application. Lake Simcoe Region Conservation Authority The LSRCA has no objection to the Zoning By-law amendment application. Central York Fire Services CYFS has no objection to the Zoning By-law amendment application. General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, February 18, 2020 Item R6 Page 8 of 17 February 18, 2020 Page 9 of 11 Report No. PDS20-013 Public Comments No comments were made by the public at the September 25, 2019 Statutory Public Meeting. Prior to this meeting however, two written submissions were received by the Town. The following is a summary of the submissions: • Concern about how this development will affect property values; • No concerns regarding the Zoning By-law amendment application. Planning Staff have considered the comments received and consider the proposed amendment to be minor in nature. Additionally, staff do not anticipate that the proposed amendment will result in any negative impacts to the host community and is in keeping with the overall character of the existing neighbourhood. Advisory Committee Review No communication required. Legal Considerations Section 34(11) of the Planning Act states that if Council refuses the application or fails to make a decision on it within 150 days after the receipt of the application, the applicant (or the Minister) may appeal the application to the Local Planning Appeal Tribunal (LPAT). This application was received on June 18, 2019 and therefore, the applicant may appeal to the LPAT at any time. Financial Implications The future development of the site would be subject to a consent application; as such fees & securities may be required through this process. The future development of this site will also generate Development Charges as well as a cash-in-lieu of Parkland Dedication required to be paid by the Owner. General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, February 18, 2020 Item R6 Page 9 of 17 February 18, 2020 Page 10 of 11 Report No. PDS20-013 Communications Considerations The Town consulted with residents on this matter and have listened and acknowledged their concerns. On September 25, 2019, a Notice of Complete Application and a Public Planning Meeting notice were published in the Aurora Banner and the Auroran newspapers. In addition, property owners located within a minimum of 120 metres of the subject lands were sent letters notifying them. On August 27, 2019 two Notice of Public Planning Meeting signs were posted on the subject lands fronting Willow Farm Lane and St. John’s Sideroad West. During the September 25, 2019 Statutory Public Meeting, no comments were provided by the public. Two written submissions were received and the summaries are contained on page 9 of this report under the Public Comments Section. There were no interested parties listed with the Town’s Planning and Development Services that would have needed to be notified in advance of this General Committee meeting. Link to Strategic Plan The proposed Zoning By-law Amendment supports the Strategic Plan goal of supporting an exceptional quality of life for all through its accomplishment in satisfying requirements in the following key objectives within this goal statement: Strengthening the fabric of our community: Through the proposed Zoning By-law amendment on the subject lands, the applications will assist in ensuring future growth includes housing opportunities for everyone. Alternative(s) to the Recommendation 1. That Council provides direction. Conclusions Planning and Development Services have reviewed the proposed Zoning By-law Amendment Application and consider it to be consistent with Provincial and Regional Policies, the Town’s Official Plan, Zoning By-law and municipal development standards respecting the subject lands. Staff recommend approval of Zoning By-law Amendment Application ZBA-2019-02. General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, February 18, 2020 Item R6 Page 10 of 17 General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, February 18, 2020 Item R6 Page 11 of 17 W i l l o w F a r m L a n eHeatherfield LaneStJohn'sSideroadSt John's SideroadLOCATION MAPMap created by the Town of Aurora Planning and Building Services Department, September 4, 2019. Base data provided by York Region & the Town of Aurora. Air Photos taken Spring 2018, © First Base Solutions Inc., 2018 Orthophotography.¯FIGURE 1St John's SdrdWellington St EVandorf SdrdHenderson Drive^Wellington St WUV404UV404Leslie StYonge StBathurst StBayview AveBloomington Rd0255075100MetresAPPLICANT: AllanFILES: ZBA-2019-02SUBJECT LANDSGeneral Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, February 18, 2020 Item R6 Page 12 of 17 CraigleeC our tHeatherfield LaneWilkinsonPlaceWillowFarmLaneST JOHN'S SIDEROADEXISTING OFFICIAL PLAN DESIGNATIONMap created by the Town of Aurora Planning & Building Services Department, September 4, 2019. Base data provided by York Region & the Town of Aurora.¯0255075100MetresAPPLICANT: AllanFILES: ZBA-2019-02FIGURE 2St John's SdrdWellington St EVandorf SdrdHenderson Drive^Wellington St WUV404UV404Leslie StYonge StBathurst StBayview AveBloomington RdSUBJECT LANDSPrivate ParklandEstate Residential!!!!!!Schedule A OPAPublic ParklandStable NeighbourhoodsEnvironmental ProtectionExisting Major InstitutionalGeneral Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, February 18, 2020 Item R6 Page 13 of 17 EPO2(75)ER(72)R2(74)IEP(97)EPO2(75)ER(72)ER(98)R2(74)RU-ORMRUEXISTING ZONINGMap created by the Town of Aurora Planning & Building Services Department, January 15, 2020. Base data provided by York Region & the Town of Aurora.¯050100150200MetresAPPLICANT: AllanFILES: ZBA-2019-02FIGURE 3St John's SdrdWellington St EVandorf SdrdHenderson Drive^Wellington St WUV404UV404Leslie StYonge StBathurst StBayview AveBloomington RdSUBJECT LANDSInstitutionalIINSTITUTIONAL ZONESRURAL ZONESEstate ResidentialEROak Ridges MoraineOpen SpaceO-ORMZoning LegendDetached SecondDensity ResidentialRESIDENTIAL ZONESR2Major Open SpaceOPEN SPACES ZONESOEnvironmental ProtectionEPRuralRUER(73)ER(73)General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, February 18, 2020 Item R6 Page 14 of 17 Map created by the Town of Aurora Planning & Development Services Department, January 20, 2020. Drawing provided by Architectural CAAD Studio. PROPOSED ZONING APPLICANT: Allan FILES: ZBA-2019-02 FIGURE 4 R2-74General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, February 18, 2020 Item R6 Page 15 of 17 Map created by the Town of Aurora Planning & Development Services Department, January 20, 2020. Drawing provided by Architectural CAAD Studio. PROPOSED SEVERANCE & SITE PLAN APPLICANT: Allan FILES: ZBA-2019-02 FIGURE 5 General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, February 18, 2020 Item R6 Page 16 of 17 Map created by the Town of Aurora Planning & Building Services Department, September 4, 2019.PROPOSED SINGLE-DETACHED DWELLINGAPPLICANT: AllanFILES: ZBA-2019-02FIGURE 6General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, February 18, 2020 Item R6 Page 17 of 17 Notice of Motion Councillor Sandra Humfryes Date: February 18, 2020 To: Mayor and Members of Council From: Councillor Humfryes Re: Open Cousins Drive Railway Crossing Whereas the Cousins Drive Railway Crossing has been closed and fenced off for several years due to safety concerns by Metrolinx; and Whereas Aurora prides itself in active transportation as demonstrated, for example, through local active programs such as Activate Aurora; and Whereas the closed and fenced off Cousins Drive crossing is preventing walkability for the residents of our Town; 1. Now Therefore Be It Hereby Resolved That staff work with our local MPPs for their support and to advocate for Aurora to Metrolinx for re-opening the Cousins Drive Crossing and that staff provide an update report by the end of April 2020. General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, February 18, 2020 Notice of Motion (a) Page 1 of 1