Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutSeptember 12, 2011 Citq oo Executive Committee Meeting Agenda Monday, September 12, 2011 ON iii & t' PICKERING Council Chambers 7:30 pm Chair: Councillor Dickerson (1) Matters for Consideration Pages 1. Director, Community Services, Report CS 28-11 1 -9 Tender for Supply & Delivery of One 41,000 Ib.GVW Diesel Snow Plow/Dump/Sander Truck -Tender No. T-12-2011 Recommendation 1. That Report CS 28-11 of the Director, Community Services regarding the supply and delivery of one 41,000 lb. GVW Diesel Snow Plow/Dump/Sander Truck be received; 2. That Tender No. T-12-2011, as.submitted by Scarborough Truck Centre Inc. for the supply and delivery of one 41,000 lb. GVW Diesel Snow Plow/Dump/Sander Truck in the amount of $179,077 (HST extra) be accepted; 3. That the total gross cost of $203,487 and a net cost of $183,246 be approved; 4. That Council authorize the Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer to finance the project as follows; . a) the sum of $180,000 be financed by the issue of debentures through the Regional Municipality of Durham for a period not exceeding five (5) years, at a rate to be determined; b) that the sum of $3,246 plus issuing costs be funded from property taxes; c) that the financing and repayment charges in the amount of approximately $41,500 be included in the annual Current Budget for the City of Pickering commencing in 2012 and continuing thereafter until the loan is repaid; Accessible i For information related to accessibility requirements please contact Linda Roberts P I C K S UN G Phone: 905.420.4660 extension 2928 TTY: 905.420.1739 Email: IrobertsOcitvofpickerina.com Executive Committee Meeting Agenda Monday, September,12, 2011 PICKERING Council Chambers 7:30 pm Chair: Councillor Dickerson d) that the Treasurer be authorized to undertake the financing of this project or portions thereof that cannot be accommodated through the foregoing through internal loans, the Ontario Strategic Infrastructure Financing Authority (OSIFA) - Loan Program or a financial institution offering long term financing under similar terms and conditions; e) that the Treasurer be authroized to make any changes, adjustments, and revisions to amounts, terms, conditions or take any actions necessary in order to effect the foregoing; and 5. That the draft by-law attached to this report be enacted; and 6. That the appropriate City of Pickering Officials be authorized to take necessary action to give effect thereto. 2. Director, Community Services, Report CS 29-11 10 - 18 Financial Partnership Land Acquisition With Toronto & Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) Lands of Joyce Andrews and Phyllis Brown Recommendation 1. That Report CS 29-11 of the Director, Community Services regarding the Financial Partnership with Toronto & Region Conservation Authority regarding a land acquisition from lands of Joyce Andrews and Phyllis Brown, at a cost not exceeding 50% of the total cost of $12,850, whichever is the lowest, be received; 2. That the Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer be authorized to fund the City's share of the cost of the land acquisition as follows: $10,000 from the City's Current Budget Grants to Organizations and Individuals (account 2195- 2712) and up to $2,850 from sub account 2712 and from funds otherwise available at the end of the current year; and, 3. That the appropriate City of Pickering Officials be authorized to take necessary action o give effect thereto. Ctr,~ o~ Executive Committee Meeting Agenda _ Monday, September 12, 2011 PICKERING Council Chambers 7:30 pm Chair: Councillor Dickerson 3. Director, Community Services, Report CS 30-11 19 - 27 Speed Limits By-law, Twyn Rivers Drive Community Safety Zones By-law, Twyn Rivers Drive Amendment to By-law 6604/05 i Recommendation 1. That Report CS 30-11 of the Director, Community Services regarding a proposed amendment to the municipal traffic by-law 6604/05 be received; 2. That the attached draft by-law be enacted to amend Schedule "9" to By-law 6604/05 to provide for the regulation of speed limits on highways or parts of highways under the jurisdiction of the Corporation of the City of Pickering; and 3. That the attached draft by-law be enacted to amend Schedule "14" to By-law 6604/05 to provide for the regulation of Community Safety Zones on highways or parts of highways under the jurisdiction of -the Corporation of the City of Pickering. 4. Director, Community Services, Report CS 31-11 28 - 32 Traffic and Parking By-law, Liverpool Road Amendment to By-law 6604/05 Recommendation 1. That Report CS 31-11 of the Director, Community. Services regarding a proposed amendment to the municipal traffic by-law 6604/05 be received; and 2. That the attached draft by-law be enacted to amend Schedule "2" to By-law 6604/05 to provide for the regulation of parking on highways or parts of highways under the jurisdiction of the Corporation of the City of Pickering 5. Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer, Report CST 30-11 33 - 38 Formal Quotations - Quarterly Report for Information Recommendation Executive Committee Meeting Agenda _ Monday, September 12, 2011 PICKERIN Council Chambers 7:30 pm Chair: Councillor Dickerson That Report CST 30-11 of the Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer regarding Formal Quotations - Quarterly Report for Information be received for information. 6. Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer, Report CST 32-11 39 95 Municipal Performance Measurement Program - Provincially Mandated Public Reporting of Performance Measures Recommendation That Report CST 32-11 from the Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer be received for information. 7. Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer, Report CST 33-11 96 - 101 2011 Final Tax Due Dates for Commercial, Industrial and Multi-Residential Realty Tax Classes Recommendation 1. That Report CST 33-11 of the Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer be received; 2. That the Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer be authorized to issue the final 2011 Tax Bills for Commercial, Industrial and Multi-residential properties with a due date of October 14, 2011; 3. That the Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer be authorized to make any changes or undertake any actions necessary, including altering the due date, in order to ensure the tax billing process is completed and in order to comply with Provincial Regulations; 4. That the draft by-law attached to this report be enacted; and, 5. That the appropriate City of Pickering officials be authorized to take the necessary actions to give effect thereto. 8. Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer, Report CST 34-11 1.02-112 Cash Position Report as at June 30, 2011 Recommendation I otq o~ Executive Committee Meeting Agenda _ Monday, September 12, 2011 PICKERING Council Chambers 7:30 pm Chair: Councillor Dickerson That Report CST 34-11 from the Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer be received for information. 9. Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer, Report CST 35-11 -113-1,15 Council Compensation Policy Recommendation 1. That Report CST 35-11 of the Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer be received; 2. That the revised wording for Section 06.03 of the Council Compensation Policy, included as Attachment #1, be approved; and, 3. That the appropriate officials of the City of Pickering be authorized to take the necessary actions to give effect hereto. 10. Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer, Report CST 36-11 116-136 Tender / Contract Approval Councils' Summer Recess Recommendation 1. That Report CST 36-11 of the Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer regarding tender and contract approvals during Councils' Summer Recess be received; and, 2. That Council pass a resolution ratifying the approval of the Tenders and Contracts by the Chief Administrative Officer during Councils' summer recess being: Request for Proposal No. RFP-2-2011 - Design, Supply. and Installation of two Ultra Violet Treatment Systems at two City Pools; and, Request for Proposal No. RFP-3-2011 - Redesign of Website. 11. Chief Administrative Officer Report CAO 12-11 137 - 186 Enhancement Projects in the City of Pickering Southeast Collector Trunk Sewer Recommendation Executive Committee Meeting Agenda Monday, September 12, 2011 PI KERING Council Chambers 7:30 pm Chair: Councillor Dickerson 1. That Report CAO 12-11 of the Chief Administrative Officer, regarding the enhancement projects in the City of Pickering from the Southeast Collector Trunk Sewer project be received; I 2. That Council approve the infrastructure, recreational and ecological enhancement projects as set out in Attachments #2 and #3 to this Report; such that Attachment #2 sets out the enhancement projects which constitute. the $8.0 million of funds that are available, and Attachment #3 sets out additional enhancement projects that could be selected should the $8.0 million limit not be reached, or additional external funding for the Frenchman's Bay Harbour Entrance project not be secured; 3. That Council authorize the Mayor and Clerk to execute a Funding Agreement with the Regional Municipality of York respecting the enhancement projects, essentially as set out in Attachment #5 to this Report, in a form acceptable to the City Solicitor and Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer; 4. That Council authorize staff to work on the implementation of the enhancement projects in the City of Pickering, as per the terms and conditions of the Funding Agreement, throughout the term of the Agreement; 5. That, notwithstanding the City's Purchasing Policy, City staff be authorized to enter into appropriate arrangements/contracts with the Toronto and Region Conservation Authority to undertake the ecological restoration enhancement projects E2, E3 and E5 at an estimated cost of $385,000, as identified in Attachment #2 to this Report; and as provided for in the approved 2011 Parks Capital Budget, project number 5780.1114; 6. That the implementation of enhancement projects be approved through the annual Capital Budget process during the period 2012 to 2017 recognizing that $3.0 million has been approved in the 2011 Capital Budget for projects that may commence in 2011; 7. That Council be advised that the Frenchman's Bay Harbour Entrance Project, approved in the 2010 Capital Budget as a 100% external grant funded project, will now require contributions from both the City of Pickering and York Region, and the project and revised funding will be reintroduced in the 2012 Capital Budget; 8. That a copy of Report CAO 12-11 be forwarded to the Regional Municipality of York, the Regional Municipality of Durham, Toronto and Region Citq 00 Executive Committee Meeting Agenda _ Monday, September 12, 2011 PICKERIN Council Chambers 7:30 pm Chair: Councillor Dickerson Conservation Authority, Durham District School Board, and the Durham District Catholic School Board for information; and 9. Further, that the appropriate officials of the City be authorized to take the necessary action to give effect hereto. 12. Chief Administrative Officer Report CAO 13-11 187 - 193 Animal Sheltering Services Recommendation 1. That Report CAO 13-11 be received; 2. That the current lease and servicing agreement with The Dog Pad Inc. which expires on December 31, 2011, located at 15 Reesor Road not be renewed. 3. That Council provide pre 2012 Capital Budget approval for the following: a) that the Mayor and Clerk be authorized to enter into a 5 year lease, in a form acceptable to the Chief Administrative Officer, the Director of Corporate Services & Treasurer and the City Solicitor, with Transport Canada for the property located at 1688 Highway No. 7; and b) leasehold improvements, furniture and fixtures in the estimated amount of $100,000. 4. That Council authorize the Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer to the finance the project as follows: a) the estimated project cost for leasehold improvements, furniture, fixtures, and equipment through an internal loan not to exceed $100,000 at a term not to exceed five years; b) the internal loan be undertaken from the Development Charges Reserve Funds at a rate of 2.5%; c) the loan be repaid through an annual savings in lease and service costs allocated in the current budget for Animal Services in the estimated amount including financing cost of $21,500 annually until the loan is repaid; and ;(Zitq ao Executive Committee Meeting Agenda Monday, September 12, 2011 PI KERI G Council Chambers 7:30 pm Chair: Councillor Dickerson d) the Treasurer be authorized to make any changes, adjustments, and revisions to the amount, term, and conditions or take any actions necessary in order to effect the foregoing; 5.' That the appropriate officials of the City of Pickering be given the authority to give effect thereto. (II) Other Business (III) Adjournment I cis o~ Report To - Executive Committee PICKERING Report Number: CS 28-11 Date: September 12, 2011 01 From: Everett Buntsma Director, Community Services Subject: Tender for Supply & Delivery of One 41,000 Ib.GVW Diesel Snow Plow/Dump/Sander Truck - Tender No. T-12-2011 - File: A-1440 Recommendation: 1. That Report CS 28-11 of the Director, Community Services regarding the supply and delivery of one 41,000 lb. GVW Diesel Snow Plow/Dump/Sander Truck be received; 2. That Tender No.T-12-2011, as submitted by Scarborough Truck Centre Inc. for the supply and delivery of one 41,000 lb. GVW Diesel Snow Plow/Dump/Sander Truck in the amount of $179,077 (HST extra) be accepted; 3. That the total gross cost of $203,487 and a net cost of $183,246 be approved; 4. That Council authorize the Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer to finance the project as follows; (a) the sum of $180,000 be financed by the issue of debentures through the Regional Municipality of Durham for a period not exceeding five (5) years, at a rate to be determined; (b) that the sum of $3,246 plus issuing costs be funded from property taxes; (c) that the financing and repayment charges in the amount of approximately $41,500 be included in the annual Current Budget for the City of Pickering commencing in 2012 and continuing thereafter until the loan is repaid; (d) that the Treasurer be authorized to undertake the financing of this project or portions thereof that cannot be accommodated through the foregoing through internal loans, the Ontario Strategic Infrastructure Financing Authority (OSIFA) - Loan Program or a financial institution offering long term financing under similar terms and conditions; Report CS 28-11 September 12, 2011 Subject: Supply & Delivery of One 41,000 lb. GVW Diesel Page 2 Snow Plow/Dump/Sander Truck Tender No. T-12-2011 02 (e) that the Treasurer be authorized to make any changes, adjustments, and revisions to amounts, terms, conditions or take any actions necessary in order to effect the foregoing; and 5. That the draft by-law attached to this report be enacted; and, 6. That the appropriate City of Pickering Officials be authorized to take necessary action to give effect thereto ' Executive Summary: The City of Pickering currently utilizes a fleet comprised of nine (9) 4-ton dump trucks and three (3) 5-ton dump trucks to perform a wide range of road maintenance activities including winter control. A replacement for the oldest 4-ton truck was approved in the 2011 Capital Budget. The tender for this project was advertised on the City's website and (1) one vendor. responded. Upon review, the vehicle that meets the City's requirements and specifications is being recommended. Financial Implications: 1. Tender Amount Tender No. T-12-2011 41,000 lb. GVW $179,077 Diesel Snow Plow/Dump/Sander Truck HST (13%) 23,280 Total Gross Tender Cost $202,357 HST Rebate (11.24%) (20,128) Total Net Tender Cost $182,229 2. Approved Source of Funds 2011 Roads Capital Budge t Item Account Code Source of Funds Budget Required 4-ton Dump Truck with 5320.1102.6158 Debt - 5 Years $210,000 $180,000 Wing and Plow Property Taxes 0 3,246 Total Funds $210,000 $183,246 CORP0227-07/01 revised Report CS 28-11 September 12, 2011 Subject: Supply & Delivery of One 41,000 lb. GVW Diesel Page 3 Snow Plow/Dump/Sander Truck Tender No. T-12-2011 03 3. Estimated Project Costing Summa Tender No. T-12-2011 41,000 lb. GVW $179,077 Diesel Snow Plow/Dump/Sander Truck Licence Fees & Associated Costs 11000 Total Cost $180,077 HST (13%) 23,410 Total Gross Cost $ 203,487 HST Rebate (11.24%) (20,241) Total Net Cost $183,246 4. Project Cost under (over) approved funds by $26,754 The Director, Corporate Services and Treasurer has updated the City's 2011 Annual Repayment Limit and certified that this loan and the repayment thereof falls within the City's Annual Repayment Limit for debentures and financial obligations, and would not cause the City to exceed the updated Limit, and therefore, the Ontario Municipal Board approval is not required prior to City Council's authorization. The Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer has reviewed the budgetary implications and the financing of the expenditure contained in this report and concurs. Sustainability Implications: The engine powering this equipment meets the Environmental Protection Agency's Tier IIII emission standard. This will significantly reduce the amount of harmful emissions created by the operation of the vehicle as well as provide increased fuel economy. This purchase conforms to the environmental and economic lens of sustainability. Background: The purchase of a 4-ton Dump Truck with Wing and Plow was identified and approved by Council in the 2011 Roads Capital Budget. The gross vehicle weight (GVW) of a 4-ton truck is 41,000 lbs. Supply & Services posted the tender on the City's website. One bidder responded and has submitted a tender for this vehicle. Upon careful examination of the tender received, it has been determined that all of the required specifications have been met. It is therefore the recommendation of the Community Services Department that the bid submitted by Scarborough Truck Inc. in the amount of $179,077 (HST extra) be accepted and that the total net cost of $183,246 be approved. This report has been prepared in conjunction with the Manager, Supply & Services, who concurs with the foregoing. CORP0227-07/01 revised I Report CS 28-11 September 12, 2011 Subject: Supply & Delivery of One 41,000 lb. GVW Diesel Page 4 04 Snow Plow/Dump/Sander Truck Tender No. T-12-2011 Attachments: 1. Summary memo from Supply & Services 2. Record of Tenders Opened and Checked 3. Being a by-law to authorize the supply and delivery of one 41,000 lb. GVW Diesel Snow Plow/Dump/Sander Truck in the City of Pickering and the issuance of debentures therefor in the amount of $180,000 Prepared By: Approved/E rse By: Grant Smith Everett nts Manager, unicipal Operations Director, & Fleet Se ices Community Services Department Vera "k Felge her Gillis A. Paterson, CMA C.P.P., CPPO, CP , C.P.M., CMM III Director, Corporate Services & Manager, Sup, y & Services Treasurer Caryn Kong, CGA Senior. Financial Analyst-Capital & Debt Management GS:nw Copy: Chief Administrative Officer Recommended for the consideration of Pickering City Council 23, 20 T. Prevedel P.Eng Chief Administrative Officer CORP0227-07/01 revised ATTACHMENT# TO REP ATEWEIVED JUN 15 2011 I, 05 CITY OF PICKERING PICKERING ENGINEERING SERVICES Memo 1811 BICENTENNIAL 2011 To: Everett Buntsma June 14, 2011 Director, Community Services , i From: Vera A. Felgemacher Manager, Supply & Services I Copy: Manager, Municipal Operations & Fleet Services Subject: Tender No. T-12-2011 - Tender for the Supply & Delivery of One (1) 41,000 LB. GVW Diesel Snow Plow/Dump/Sander Truck - File: F-5400-001 Tenders have been received for the above project. An advertisement was placed on the City's website inviting companies to download the tendering documents for the above mentioned tender. One (1) bidder submitted a tender for this project. Purchasing Procedure No. PUR 010-001, Item 10.03 (r) provides checking tendered unit prices and extensions unit prices shall govern and extensions will be corrected accordingly, which has been done. A copy of the tender is attached for.your review along with the summary of costs. SUMMARY Harmonized Sales Tax Included Bidder Total Tendered Amount After Calculation Check Scarborough Truck Centre $202,357.01 $202,357.01 Please include the following items in your Report to Council: (a) any past work experience with Scarborough Truck Centre; (b) without past work experience, if reference information is acceptable; (c) the appropriate account number(s) to which this work is to be charged; (d) the budget amount(s) assigned thereto; (e) Treasurer's confirmation of funding; (f) related departmental approvals; and (g) related comments specific to the project. Please do not disclose any information to enquiries except you can direct them to the City's website for the unofficial bid results as read out at the public tender opening. Bidders will be advised of the outcome in due course. ATTACHME.NT# f TOREPORT#- 06 If you require further information, please e~ el free toocontact me or a member of Supply & Services. VAF/b Attachments I_ I r A June 14, 2011 Tender No. T-12-2011 Page 2 Tender for the Supply & Delivery of One (1) 41,000 LB. GVW Diesel Snow Plow/Dump/Sander Truck ATTACHMENT# i O P,EP® rT of _ 07 Y U H ~ d w a R ~ U) O Q. U E 3 ~n o a N 3 X z' 0 o z c a - U) n O_ C) m Q W C() U E w w i= o _ > U c~ m 0 p m N C7 Q oo Z_ p C EE 0 W Y Z w w v _ a T H ~O (U U- U) O w ° F- Q M -ca p y ai c m I- Z > is o H l U Fw- p ^O 'o F- LL p a Ef3 69 6F} 69 69 60- 63 61} 69- 09, 69- O ~ r- U o w N N o~L a Q Q C U N ~ p -p c N N E U cam` p H (9 U v C Z< ~ N m ~ O O (0 z U w U) w LL Q H } U ATTACHMENT#-a_, ! 0, RE PORT -I- of _C2,_ - 08 The Corporation of the City of Pickering By-law No. Being a by-law to authorize the supply and delivery of one 41,000 lb. GVW Diesel Snow Plow/Dump/Sander Truck in the City of Pickering and the issuance of debentures therefor in the amount of $180,000 Whereas Section 11 of the Municipal Act, 2001, as amended, provides that a lower-tier municipality may pass by-laws respecting matters within the spheres of jurisdiction described in that Section; and, Whereas Subsection 401(1) of the Municipal Act, 2001, as amended, provides that a municipality may incur a debt for municipal purposes, whether by borrowing money or in any other way; and, Whereas Subsection 401(3) of the Municipal Act, 2001, as amended, provides that a lower-tier municipality in a regional municipality does not have the power to issue debentures; and, Whereas The Regional Municipality of Durham has the sole authority to issue debentures for the purposes of its lower-tier municipalities including The Corporation of the City of Pickering (the "City"); and, Whereas the Council of the City wishes to proceed with the supply and delivery of one 41,000 lb. GVW Diesel Snow Plow/Dump/Sander Truck; and, Whereas before the Council of the City authorized the supply and delivery of one 41,000 lb. GVW Diesel Snow Plow/Dump/Sander Truck, the Council of the City had the Treasurer update the City's Annual Repayment Limit, the Treasurer calculated the estimated annual amount payable in respect of such project and determined that such annual amount would not cause the City to exceed the updated limit and, therefore, Ontario Municipal Board approval was not required prior to City Council's authorization as per Section 401 of the Municipal Act, 2001, as amended, and the regulations made thereunder; And whereas after determining that Ontario Municipal Board approval is not required, the Council of the City approved Report CS 28-11 on the date hereof and awarded Tender T-12-2011 for the supply and delivery of one 41,000 lb. GVW Diesel Snow Plow/Dump/Sander Truck. r ATTACHMENT#2 TO REPORT.. By-law No. o`Z Of Page 2 09 Now therefore the Council of The Corporation of the City of Pickering hereby enacts as follows: 1. That the City proceed with the supply and delivery of one "41,000 lb. GVW Diesel Snow Plow/Dump/Sander Truck"; 2. That the estimated costs of the project in the amount of $183,246 be financed as follows: a) That the sum of $180,000 be financed by the issue of debentures by The Regional Municipality of Durham over a period not to exceed five (5) years; b) That the sum of $3,246 be funded from property taxes; 3. That the funds to repay the principal and interest of the debentures be provided for in the annual Current Budget for the City commencing in 2012 and continuing thereafter until the loan is repaid. By-law read a first, second and third time and finally passed this 19 day of September, 2011. David Ryan, Mayor Debbie Shields, City Clerk Cal o¢~ Report To PICKERING Executive Committee Report Number: CS 29-11 Date: September 12, 2011 10 From: Everett Buntsma Director, Community Services Subject: Financial Partnership Land Acquisition - with Toronto & Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) - Lands of Joyce Andrews and Phyllis Brown - File: A-1440-001-11 Recommendation: 1. That Report CS 29-11 of the Director, Community Services regarding the Financial Partnership with Toronto & Region Conservation Authority regarding a land acquisition from lands of Joyce Andrews and Phyllis Brown, at a cost not exceeding. 50% of the total cost or $12,850, whichever is the lowest, be received; 2. That the Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer be authorized to fund the City's share of the cost of the land acquisition as follows: $10,000 from the City's Current Budget Grants to Organizations- and Individuals (account 2195-2712) and up to $2,850 from sub account 2712 and from funds otherwise available at the end of the current year; and 3. That the appropriate City of Pickering Officials be authorized to take necessary action to give effect thereto. Executive Summary: Since 1988, Pickering has supported partnership land acquisition with the TRCA, in a jointly beneficial effort to protect the waterfront and enhance public access and trail opportunities. On March 1, 1999 Council approved Resolution #41/99 endorsing the concept of 50% maximum funding, for Waterfront land acquisition. This approach was consistent with and predicated on the "Mayor's Task Force on the Pickering Waterfront Final Report" and actions outlined in Report to Council IDT 80-98. The lands on the west side of Frenchman's Bay are critical to the achievement of the City's "Waterfront Vision". The lands are situated on the west side of Frenchman's Bay and are adjoining TRCA owned lands to the north and TRCA to the south and lands are Report CS 29-11 September 12, 2011 Subject: Financial Partnership Land Acquisition - with Toronto & Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) - Lands of Joyce Andrews and Phyllis Brown Page 2 11 comprised of tableland only. This acquisition will assist in enabling the implementation of the Rotary Frenchman's Bay West Master plan. Staff strongly recommends participation in the acquisition of lands from Joyce Andrews and Phyllis Brown in partnership with TRCA. Financial Implications: The 2011 Current Budget, Grants to Organizations and Individuals, contained a provision for a TRCA Joint Funding Environmental Project in the amount of $10,000. It is anticipated that these funds will not be required this year so it is appropriate to use them for this joint TRCA land acquisition. The balance of funds, $2,850, can come from the same account from the "To be Determined" allocation of $2,000 and from funds otherwise available at the end of the current fiscal year. Sustainability Implications: Preservation of additional waterfront lands is environmentally sustainable. Protection of the lands for future trail development meets the social needs for the City, regarding the waterfront. Background: Not applicable. Attachments: 1. Letter and Report from Toronto & Region Conservation Authority 2. Resolution #41/99 3. Location Map Prepared By: Endorsed By: Evere untsma Gillis Paterson Director, Community Services Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer CORP0227-07/01 revised Report CS 29-11 September 12, 2011 Subject: Financial Partnership Land Acquisition - with Toronto & Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) - Lands of Joyce Andrews and Phyllis Brown Page 3 EB:mid Copy: Chief Administrative Officer Recommended for the consideration of Pickering City 99uncil 2S ZOl~ / Tony Prevedel, P. Eng. Chief Administrative Officer CORP0227-07101 revised TORONTO AND REGIOIVT MENT# TO REPORT#ffs~/ ' Xonservation. rj of 13 for The Living City Cor"Muni . Services RECEIVED July 21, 2011 14LE NO. ANY. TO , Mr. Everett Buntsma 0FVVD 000PY 0CNtCULATE Director, Operations and Emergency Services MAYOR COUNCIL City of Pickering CAO CLERK Civic Complex CUL 6REC CORP SERVICES ENG SERVICES HUMAN RESOURCES One The Esplanade OPS CENTRE LEGAL Pickering, ON FAC OPERATIONS OFFICE SUSTAIN L1 V 6K7 FIRE PLAN i DEV - Dear Mr. Buntsma: Re: GREENLANDS ACQUISITION PROJECT FOR 2011-2015 Lake Ontario Waterfront, Pickering/Ajax Sector Joyce Andrews and Phyllis Brown Our File: CFN 44653 Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) at Meeting #6/11, held on June 24, 2011, adopted the following resolution: RES.#A129/11 THAT 0.06 hectares (0.14 acres), more or less, of vacant land being Part of Lot 26, Range 3, Broken Front Concession and designated as Lot 96 on Plan 345, City of Pickering, Regional Municipality of Durham, located north of Beachpoint Promenade, east of West Shore Boulevard (municipally known as 932 Beachpo,int Promenade), be purchased from Joyce Andrews and Phyllis Brown; THAT the purchase price be $20,000.00; THAT Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) receive conveyance of the land free from encumbrance, subject to existing service easements; THAT the firm of Gardiner Roberts LLP, Barristers & Solicitors, be instructed to complete the transaction at the earliest possible date. All reasonable expenses. incurred incidental to the closing for land transfer tax, legal costs, and disbursements are to be paid; AND FURTHER THAT authorized TRCA officials be directed to take the necessary action to finalize the transaction including obtaining needed approvals and signing and execution of documentation. CARRIED ....2 Member of Conservation Ontario 5 Shoreham Drive, Downsview, Ontario M3N 1S4 (416) 661-6600 FAX 661-6898 www.trca.on.ca ATTACHMENT# TO REPORT# Cs,25-11 1 4of Ey-e eLBunt%r a Page 2 July 21, 2011 The Joyce Andrews and Phyllis Brea n property falls within TRCA's approved master plan for acquisition for the Lake Ontario shoreline as outlined in the approved Greenlands Acquisition project for 2011-2015. The property as completely surrounded by lands owned by TRCA; this _,aggWsiton would c- omr)lete=the contolidation of land in public ownership as envisioned for the West end of:Frenchman's Bayby,the City of Pickering's waterfront vision. The details relating to this matter are set out in the enclosd staff report dated May 17, 2011. As you Will note from the report, thepurchase price is $20,000.00. To complete the transaction, we.estimate. that we will need approximately $3,500.00 for legal fees and disbursements as well as $2,200.00 for an env ronmental-audit for a total of $25,700.00. We respectfully request that the City of Pickering contribute 50% towards the acquisition costs. We would be pleased to provide all relevant information related to this acquisition if required; if you have any questions or require further information, please do not hesitate to contact the undersigned. Yours very truly, 4AI eMicaelenning, Senior Manager Conservation Lands and Property Services Extension 5223 Enclosure GL cc: Nancy Gaffney, Waterfront Specialist - TRCA ATTACHMENT# I_.,_ TO REPORT# !L 2q -l _of1-f- 15 Requester Approvers SECTION: SECTION I - ITEMS FOR AUTHORITY ACTION CONFIDENTIAL: No Item TO:. Chair and Members of the Executive Committee Meeting #5/11, June 10, 2011 FROM: James W. Dillane, Director, Finance and Business Services RE: GREENLANDS ACQUISITION PROJECT FOR 2011-2015 Flood Plain and Conservation Component, Waterfront Watershed Joyce Andrews and Phyllis Brown CFN 44653 KEY ISSUE: Purchase of property located north of Beachpoint Promenade, east of West Shore Boulevard (municipally known as 932 Beachpoint Promenade), City of Pickering, Regional Municipality of Durham, under the "Greenlands Acquisition Project for 2011-2015", Flood Plain and Conservation Component, Waterfront watershed. RECOMMENDATION THE EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE RECOMMENDS THAT 0.06 hectares (0.14 acres), more or less, of vacant land being Part of Lot 26, Range 3, Broken Front Concession and designated as Lot 96 on Plan 345, City of Pickering, Regional Municipality of Durham, located north of Beachpoint Promenade, east of West Shore Boulevard (municipally known as 932 Beachpoint Promenade), be purchased from Joyce Andrews and Phyllis Brown; THAT the purchase price be $20,000.00; THAT Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) receive conveyance of the land free from encumbrance, subject to existing service easements; THAT the firm of Gardiner Roberts LLP, Barristers & Solicitors, be instructed to complete the transaction at the earliest possible date. All reasonable expenses incurred incidental to the closing for land transfer tax, legal costs, and disbursements are to be paid; AND FURTHER THAT authorized TRCA officials be directed to take the necessary action to finalize the transaction including obtaining needed approvals and signing and execution of documentation. BACKGROUND Resolution #A94/10 at Authority Meeting #5/10, held on June 25, 2010, approved the Greenlands Acquisition Project for 2011-2015. 1 ATTACH MENT#--L- TO REPORT# 2229 -I/ 1 6 1 of Negotiations have been conducted with Mr. Sam Samivand of Re/Max Realtron Realty Inc. Brokerage, who acts as agent on behalf of the owners. The purchase price was determined by a market value appraisal prepared for TRCA staff; the owner's have agreed to the purchase price and an Agreement of Purchase and Sale has been executed in this regard. Attached is a plan showing the location of the subject lands. RATIONALE The subject property falls within TRCA's approved master plan for acquisition for the waterfront watershed as outlined in the approved Greenlands Acquisition Project for 2011-2015. The property (i.e. lot 96 on Plan 345) is located within the Frenchman's Bay Environmentally Significant Area at this location. The property is surrounded on all four sides by TRCA land. TAXES AND MAINTENANCE It is proposed that the lands be turned over to the City of Pickering for management. FINANCIAL DETAILS Funds for the costs related to this purchase are available in the TRCA land acquisition capital account. Staff is requesting that the City of Pickering fund 50% of the purchase price. Report prepared by: George Leja, extension 5342 Emalls: gleja@trca.on.ca For Information contact: George Leja, extension 5342, Ron Dewell, extension 5245 Emails: gleja@trca.on.ca, rdewell@trca.on.ca Date: May 17, 2011 Attachments: 1 ATTACH MENT#2 -z.-r TO REPORT# CSaS-~~ 1 .7 NOW THEREFORE the Council of the Corporation of the Town of Pickering hereby requests the Toronto and Region Conservation Authority to seek matching Provincial funding as soon as possible for the acquisition of strategic private properties to facilitate implementation of key components of the Pickering Waterfront Vision; and THAT the Council of the Town of Pickering hereby indicates its willingness to participate in the acquisition fimding partnership; and THAT the Town of Pickering and the Toronto and Regional Conservation Authority act as partners to a maximum of 50% of the total acquisition funding; and THAT prior to the Council of the Town of Pickering approving any funding arrangement the Council shall be advised in a confidential report of the properties to be acquired and . the terms of the funding arrangements; and THAT The Toronto and Region Conservation Authority and the Region of Durham be so advised. CARRIED Recorded Vote: Yes: Brenner, Dickerson, Holland, Pickles, Ryan and Mayor Arthurs No: Johnson Council considered the following motion in conjunction with the above resolution: Resolution #41&/99 . Moved by Councillor Dickerson Seconded by Councillor Pickles That the following paragraph be added to the motion regarding the T.R.C.A.'s waterfront acquisition program: THAT prior to the Council of the Town of Pickering approving any funding arrangement the Council shall be advised in a confidential report of the properties to be acquired and the terms of the funding arrangements; and CARRIED (VI) CONFIRMATION BY-LAW By-law Number 5463/99 Councillor Brenner seconded by Councillor Holland moved for leave to introduce a By- law of the Town of Pickering to confirm those proceedings of the Council of the Corporation of the Town of Pickering at its regular and special meeting held on February • 15, 1999 and special meeting of February 22, 1999 and that the same be now finally passed and that the Mayor and Clerk sign the same and that the Seal of the Corporation be thereto affixed. CARRIED I ATTACHMENT#-,3- TO REPORT# C' cN-// $ of -_Z_ IVE w w w ~ Of cn o W LAHOMA O a w J FRENCHMAN'S w BA Y w N Y MINK STREET z ij I w U T= it SUNRISE AVENUE Q w 0 co SUBJECT PROPERTY STREET EXISTING TRCA PROPERTY Li o PROM~NP~E NUE G w LAKE ONTARIO COMMUNITY SERVICES ATTACHMENT FOR COMMUNITY SERVICES City o~ DEPARTMENT ENGINEERING SERVICES DIVISION REPORT CS-29-11 I I I saner: ate: LAND ACQUISITION BY TRCA - ANDREWS / BROWN 1:2 500 AUGUST 11 /2011 PROPERTY (LOT 96 ON PLAN 345) L:\MP&E\TH£A/ATIC MAPPING\MAPS\STREET BASE\0£&S D/RECTOR\ATTACHMENT FOR REPORT\ . Report to Executive Committee PI CKERIN Report Number: CS 30-11 Date: September 12, 2011 19 From: Everett Buntsma Director, Community Services Subject: Speed Limits By-law, Twyn Rivers Drive Community Safety Zones By-law, Twyn Rivers Drive Amendment to By-law 6604/05 - File: A-1440 Recommendation: 1. That Report CS 30-11 of the Director, Community Services regarding a proposed amendment to the municipal traffic by-law 6604/05 be received; 2. That the attached draft by-law be enacted to amend Schedule "9" to By-law 6604/05 to provide for the regulation of speed limits on highways -or parts of highways under the jurisdiction of the Corporation of the City of Pickering; and 3. That the attached draft by-law be enacted to amend Schedule "14" to By-law 6604/05 to provide for the regulation of Community Safety Zones on highways or parts of highways under the jurisdiction of the Corporation of the City of Pickering. Executive Summary: In response to concerns brought to Engineering Services attention, staff investigated roadway safety and traffic operations, specifically with respect to vehicular speeding on Twyn Rivers Drive. Based on the investigation. and input from the Durham Regional Police, staff propose the speed limit on Twyn Rivers Drive be changed from 50 km/h to 40 km/h from the west City Limit to Hoover Drive and that the Community Safety Zone be extended to improve the safety along this portion of roadway. Financial Implications: The acquisition and installation of speed limit and community safety zone signs can be accommodated within the Roads Current budget. Sustain'ability Implications: The concerns as presented and the recommendations, as generated by staff, address traffic safety issues within the Corporate Healthy society objectives. I I Report CS 30-11 September 12, 2011 Subject: Speed Limits By-law, Twyn Rivers Drive Page 2 20 Community Safety Zones By-law, Twyn Rivers Drive Background: In early October 2010, concerns were brought to Engineering Services staff attention regarding roadway safety and traffic operations, specifically with respect to vehicular speeding on Twyn Rivers Drive from the west city limit eastbound towards Ashwood Gate. Tywn Rivers Drive is an Arterial Type C roadway with a posted speed limit of 50 km/h from the west city limit to Hoover Drive and 40 km/h from Hoover Drive to Altona Road adjacent to St. Monica Catholic School. There is a downward slope on Tywn Rivers Drive when travelling westbound from Ashwood Gate towards the west city limit and into the Rouge Valley. Twyn Rivers Drive is also designated as a community safety zone adjacent to St. Monica Catholic School from Hoover Drive to Altona Road. In response to concerns raised, Engineering Services staff completed a traffic study from October 18, 2010 to October 22, 2010. Traffic volumes and speed data on Twyn Rivers Drive west of Ashwood Gate were collected during the course of the traffic study. The study found the average speed of vehicles on this section of Twyn Rivers Drive was approximately 51 km/h with an 85th percentile speed (the maximum speed at which 85% or the bulk of the traffic travels at) of 57 km/h. The traffic study also indicated that there were approximately 5500 vehicles using Twyn Rivers Drive daily during this time. Based on the traffic investigation, Engineering Services staff recommended an increased police presence on Twyn Rivers Drive. In late 2010, the Durham Regional Police provided speed radar enforcement on Twyn Rivers Drive on multiple occasions. In addition, at the request of area residents, ROAD WATCH, a community group aimed at increasing safety on our roadways, provided numerous speed board set ups on Twyn Rivers Drive during different days/times in late 2010. In addition, in an effort to educate motorists and encourage slower speeds, on February 10, 2011, city staff installed warning signs that read `Reduce Speed' with an arrow indicating ahead at the bottom of the hill near the west city limit and `Reduce Speed. Now' near the top of the hill in the eastbound direction. A steep hill warning sign was also installed in the westbound direction. In May 2011, the Durham Regional Police placed their speed board on Twyn Rivers Drive for approximately two weeks. In addition to displaying the speed of passing vehicles, the speed board captured information related to traffic volume and vehicular speed. Data from the speed board was provided to Engineering Services staff from the Durham Regional Police and indicated similar speeds and traffic volume to the Engineering Services staffs traffic study. Since the speed board was removed, the Durham Regional Police has provided enforcement on Twyn Rivers Drive on many occasions. Report CS 30-11 September 12,, 2011 Subject: Speed Limits By-law, Twyn Rivers Drive Page 3 Community Safety Zones By-law, Twyn Rivers Drive 21 A resident on Twyn Rivers Drive had then asked city staff to investigate traffic calming measures on Twyn Rivers Drive, including lowering the speed limit between the west city limit and Hoover Drive from 50 km/h to 40 km/h, and extending the community safety zone adjacent to St. Monica Catholic School further west to include all residences along the roadway. City staff investigated the request for the speed limit change on Twyn Rivers Drive from 50 km/h to 40 km/h and extension of the community safety zone with the assistance and input from the Durham Regional Police. Based on the investigation, the following was determined: 1. Being an Arterial Type C roadway, Twyn Rivers Drive is exempt from the 40 km/h speed limit adopted by the City for local and collector roadways. The existing 50 km/h speed limit is an appropriate speed for the design of the roadway, however, it is recognized that many vehicles travel over the posted limit making it difficult for residents to egress their driveways. Sightlines are also a contributing factor for residents having difficulties egressing their driveways. Some residents along Twyn Rivers Drive believe that lowering the speed limit would make the roadway safer since vehicles should travel at a lower speed. However, it is known that motorists tend to drive the speed that they are comfortable at and that lowering the speed limit may not change the actual speed of motorists but instead cause a higher percentage of non-compliant drivers. This would increase the chances of more motorists being fined when entering Pickering from Toronto. However, the Durham Regional Police is in favour of this change as it will assist them with their enforcement efforts, and Engineering Services staff concur. 2. Currently, the City of Pickering utilizes Community.Safety Zones solely around schools where the safety of children are of a prime concern, no other street in Pickering has a Community Safety Zone outside of a school area. However, Community Safety Zones can be used in any location, not just around schools, where the safety of residents and all users of the roadway is a concern. On Twyn Rivers Drive, the residential homes front onto both the north and south sides of the roadway and, with the difficulties that residents are experiencing backing out of their driveways (especially residents on the north side near the top of the hill), extending the Community Safety Zone is feasible and recommended. It should be noted that the rules of the road do not change within a community safety zone; however, the penalties for violations of the traffic laws can be substantially increased. This increased fine structure may provide a sufficient deterrent to discourage aggressive driving, It would be the decision of the Durham Regional Police whether or not to impose increased fines of offending motorists. Report CS 30-11 September 12, 2011 Subject: Speed Limits By-law, Twyn Rivers Drive Page 4 Community Safety Zones By-law, Twyn Rivers Drive 22 Therefore, based on the investigation and information from the traffic study, and with the support of the Durham Regional Police, Engineering Services staff proposes that the municipal Traffic By-law 6604/05 be amended to change the speed limit on Twyn Rivers Drive from 50km/h to 40km/h from the west city limit to Hoover Drive and to extend the Community Safety Zone from Hoover Drive to the most western residence on Twyn Rivers Drive. The existing and proposed speed limits and community safety zone on Twyn Rivers Drive can be found graphically on the attached sketch (Attachment 1). Attachments 1. Existing and Proposed Speed Limits and Community Safety Zone, Twyn Rivers Drive 2. Draft By-law Amendment - Schedule 9, Speed Limits 3. Draft By-law Amendment - Schedule 14, Community Safety Zones Prepared By: Approved / En sed By: ZVI' Na han Emery ntsma Coordinator, Traffic Operations Director, Community Services Ric rd W. (born, P. Eng Vng'ineering sion Hea, Services Division NE: Copy: Chief Administrative Officer Recommended for the consideration of Pickering C' Council 2-011 Tony Prevedel, P.Eng. Chief Administrative Officer ATTACH MENT# - TO REPORT# C S 30- f _I of _-L- 7 Existing Conditions Legend Existing 50 km/h Speed Limit ■ ■ ■ ■ Existing 40 km/h Speed Limit and Community Safety Zone White Pine West o ai :3 ~e rdGate 3 Cres. Ln. X Q' Y Ct. 0a~h St. O ° Starview CNR Sweetbriar o UN U- Ct. Ct. wooov Lawson St. 70rLOr E J Twyn Rivers r. Twyn Rivers Dr. timwood co Howell 3 MoN O cs m o° Q Cres. u is ar son c Roux PARK R W°°Stonehampto Ct. Littleford St. Proposed Conditions Legend Proposed 40 km/h Speed Limit • • ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ Proposed 40 km/h Speed Limit and Community Safety Zone ■ ■ ■ ■ Existing 40 km/h Speed Limit and Community Safety Zone U t~ White Pine West 0 V'01 Cres. L n. 0 St. 0 put rview CNR Sweetbriar o Ct. Ct. j wnooV Lawson St. rorLOr J y~ Twyn Rivers r. Twyn Rivers Dr. -82 imwood 0 CU Howell o MoN cs `M t. t 0 m` 10 U) Cres. °o is ar son ROUGE PARK Q p ` W°°Stonehampto Ct. a Littleford St. -1 r% f Community Services Department Existing and Proposed Speed Limits Ct, o¢ si Engineering Services Division and Community Safety Zone sew: on~wx wre:g N.T.S. Au, 2011 Twyn Rivers Drive CKER ATTACH MENT# Z_ TOREPORT# CS 30-11 24 / of 2 The Corporation of the City of Pickering By-law No. Being a By-law to amend By-law 6604/05 providing for the regulating of traffic and parking, standing and stopping on highways or parts of highways under the jurisdiction of the City of Pickering and on private and municipal property. Whereas, By-law 6604/05, as amended, provides for the regulating of traffic and parking on highways, private property and municipal property within the City of Pickering; and Whereas, it is deemed expedient to amend By-law 6604/05 to change the "Speed Limits" zones on Twyn Rivers Drive. Now therefore the Council of The Corporation of the City of Pickering hereby enacts as follows: 1. Schedule 9 to By-law 6604/05, as amended, is hereby further amended thereto by the following: Schedule 9 Speed Limits Column 1 Column 2 Column 3 Highway Limits Speed Delete Twyn Rivers Drive Hoover Drive to Altona Road 40 km/h Add Twyn Rivers Drive Full Limit 40 km/h ATTACHMENT# TO REPORT# C®3b-I l By-law No. L of-2~ Page 2 25 2. This By-law shall come into force on the date that it is approved by the Council of The City of Pickering and when signs to the effect are installed. By-law read a first, second and third time and finally passed this 19th day of September 2011. David Ryan, Mayor Debbie Shields, City Clerk ATTACHMENT# -3 TOREPORT# CS 30'I ~ 26 1 of Z The Corporation of the City of Pickering By-law No. Being a By-law to amend By-law 6604/05 providing for the regulating of traffic and parking, standing and stopping on highways or parts of highways under the jurisdiction of the City of Pickering and on private and municipal property. Whereas, By-law 6604/05, as amended, provides for the regulating of traffic and parking on highways, private property and municipal property within the City of Pickering; and Whereas, it is deemed expedient to amend By-law 6604/05 to change the "Community Safety" zones on Twyn Rivers Drive. Now therefore the Council of The Corporation of the City of Pickering hereby enacts as follows: 1. Schedule 14 to By-law 6604/05, as amended, is hereby further amended thereto by the following: Schedule 14 Community Safety Zones Column 1 Column 2 Column 3 Highway Limits Prohibited Times or Days Delete Twyn Rivers Drive Hoover Drive to Altona Road Anytime Add Twyn Rivers Drive Altona Road to 360 metres west Anytime of Ashwood Gate ATTACHMENT# . TO REPORT#CS .30-11 By-law No. Zof Z Page 2 27 2. This By-law shall come into force on the date that it is approved by the Council of The City of Pickering and when signs to the effect are installed. By-law read a first, second and third time and finally passed this 19th day of September 2011. David Ryan, Mayor Debbie Shields, City Clerk Citq Report to Executive Committee I ~KERIN Report Number: CS 31-11 28 Date: September 12, 2011 From: Everett Buntsma Director, Community Services Subject: Traffic and Parking By-law, Liverpool Road Amendment to By-law 6604/05 File: A-1440 Recommendation: 1. That Report CS 31-11 of the Director, Community Services regarding a proposed amendment to the municipal traffic by-law 6604/05 be received; and 2. That the attached draft by-law be enacted to amend Schedule "2" to By-law 6604/05 to provide for the regulation of parking on highways or parts of highways under the jurisdiction of the Corporation of the City of Pickering. Executive Summary: Due to recently completed improvements to Liverpool Road between Annland Street and Wharf Street, including the construction of parking lay-bys, City staff have removed the existing `No Parking' signage on the west side in this section of Liverpool Road and recommend that the municipal Traffic and Parking By- law 6604/05 be amended to allow parking on both sides of Liverpool Road between Annland Street and Wharf Street. Financial Implications: The removal of no parking signs has no financial implications. Sustainability Implications: The traffic concerns as presented and the recommendations, as generated by staff, address traffic safety issues within the social objectives of corporate sustainability. Background: In July 2011, improvements to Liverpool Road between Annland Street and Wharf Street were completed and included the construction of parking lay- bys. Prior to the construction of the parking lay-bys, the west side of Liverpool Road from Annland Street to Wharf Street was designated as a "no parking" area. To avoid confusion and to promote parking in the lay-bys, the No Parking signs have since been removed on this section of roadway. Report CS 31-11 September 12, 2011 Subject: Liverpool Road Parking Issues Traffic and Parking By-law, Liverpool Road Page 2 9 Based on this and in an ongoing effort to keep the municipal Parking By-laws current and accurate, Engineering Services staff recommends that the municipal Traffic and Parking By-law 6604/05 be amended to allow parking on both sides of Liverpool Road between Annland Street and Wharf Street. The removed "no parking" area and recently constructed parking lay-bys on Liverpool Road between Annland Street and Wharf Street are shown graphically in Attachment 1. Attachments 1. Removed No Parking Restrictions, Liverpool Road 2. Draft By-law Amendment - Schedule 2 No Parking Zones Prepared By: Approved / E sed By: Nathan Emery Everett Buntsma Coordinator, Traffic Operations Director, Community Services R'efiard W. H (born, P. Eng Division Head, Engineering Services Division Attachments Copy: Chief Administrative Officer Recommended for the consideration of Pickering City ouncil Zoo/ Tony Prevedel, P.Eng. Chief Administrative Officer ATTACHMENT# TORE PORT# 31-11 3 1 of I I I ANNLAND STREET ANNLAND STREET FGRemoved No Parking Area M O O O CL L u WHARF STREET WHARF STREET COMMUNITY SERVICES City o¢ DEPARTMENT ENGINEERING SERVICES DIVISION Removed No Parking Restrictions _ - ' I I - N. T. S. A 0""AUugh° 2011 Liverpool Road PICKERNG ATTACHMENT# ~ . TO REPORT# LS ~ I ~ I 31 The Corporation of the City of Pickering By-law No. Being a By-law to amend By-law 6604/05 providing for the regulating of parking, . standing and stopping on highways or parts of highways under the jurisdiction of the City of Pickering and on private and, municipal property. Whereas, By-law 6604/05, as amended, provides for the regulating of traffic and parking on highways, private property and municipal property within the City of Pickering; and; Whereas, it is deemed expedient to amend By-law 6604/05 to alter a "No Parking", zone on Liverpool Road. Now therefore the Council of The Corporation of the City of Pickering hereby enacts as follows: 1. Schedule 2 "No Parking" to By-law 6604/05, as amended, is hereby further amended thereto by the following: Schedule 2 No Parking Column 1 Column 2 Column 3 Column 4 Highway Side Limits (From/To) Prohibited Times or Days Delete Liverpool Road West 75 metres south of Ilona Anytime Park Road (south intersection) to Wharf Street Add Liverpool Road West 75 metres south of Ilona Anytime Park Road (south intersection) to Annland Street ,ATTACHMENT#_ 4 TO REPORT# By-law No. z Of Page 3 32 2. This By-law shall come into force on the date that it is approved by the Council of The City of Pickering. By-law read a first, second and third time and finally passed this 19th day of September 2011. David Ryan, Mayor Debbie Shields, City Clerk Report to Executive Committee PICKERING Report Number: CST 30-11 Date: September 12, 2011 33 From: Gillis A. Paterson Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer Subject: Formal Quotations - Quarterly Report for Information Recommendation: That Report CST 30-11 of the Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer regarding Formal Quotations - Quarterly Report for Information be received for information. Executive Summary: Council approved the Purchasing By-law on November 5, 2001 which includes a request to have a summary of contract awards arising from the formal quotation process be forwarded to Council as information only on a quarterly basis. Financial Implications: Not applicable Sustainability Implications: The City's participation in cooperative purchasing initiatives reduces paper and administrative costs. Background: In accordance with Purchasing Policy Item 04.06, a summary of contract awards arising from the formal quotation process is provided herein for the information of Council. Report CST 30-11 September 12, 2011 Subject: Formal Quotations - Quarterly Report for Information Page 2 34 Formal Quotations Summary April 1, 2011 to June 30, 2011 HST extra (unless stated otherwise) Reference No. Description Award Status Award Date Supply of Tree Trimming and Removal Services Q-2-2011 Vendor: Cressman Tree Various unit Ongoing April 11, 2011 Maintenance and prices operating costs Landscaping Ltd. and 2011 Davey Tree Expert Co. Of Canada Ltd. Security Services Ongoing Q-12-2011 Vendor: Primary Response Various unit operating costs April 29, 2011 Inc. prices 2011/2012 Year 1 of 3 Spring and Fall Stump Removal, Supply, Delivery $15,600.00, and Planting of Trees $30,150.00 To be Q-17-2011 Vendor: Uxbridge Nurseries and completed in May 2, 2011 Ltd., Cressman Tree Spring & Fall Maintenance & Landscape $11,548.80 Season 2011 Ltd., Dutchmasters Nurseries respectively Ltd. Goose Control and Egg Year 1 - April 1, Q-20-2011 Destruction Service $20,300.00 2011 to April 1, 2011 Vendor: Bright Wings September 30, Year 1 of 2 2011 Arena Refrigeration Plant Maintenance, Inspection and Year 1 - June 1, Q-25-2011 Repair Various unit 2011 to May 31, May 31, 2011 Vendor: Black & McDonald prices 2012 Ltd. Year 1 of 3 Supply and Delivery of Rental 2011 to Q-26-2011 Vehicles April 11, April 4, 2011 Vendor: Enterprise Car & $33,960.00 September 6, Truck Rental 2011 Brockridge Park - Play Area Redevelopment and Nature To be Q-28-2011 Haven Park - Park completed by May 16, 2011 Construction $37,499.00 October 28, Vendor: Colpac Construction 2011 Inc. Report CST 30-11 September 12, 2011 Subject: Formal Quotations - Quarterly Report for Information Page 3 35 Reference No. Description Award Status Award Date Supply & Delivery of One (1) Q-29-2011 Latest Model Year 16 FT. $52,593.00 Complete May 16, 2011 Wide Area Mower Vendor: Turf Care Ltd. Summer Camp & Learn to Q-30-2011 Swim Transportation $68,987.97 Completion June 20, 2011 Vendor: Stock August 26, 2011 Transportation Supply & Delivery of Two(2) Latest Model Year, 4 Door, Q-38-2011 Sedan Style Vehicles Delivery June 10, 2011 equipped with a "police $50,747.00 August 26, package or "special services 2011 package Vendor: Colombo Motors LP Supply & Delivery of Two (2) Q-46-2011 Latest Model Year Rear June 2, 2011 Discharge Riding Mower $28,520.00 Complete Vendor: Hutchinson Farm Su I Inc. Supply & Delivery of One(1) Q-49-2011 Latest Model Year Full Size 4 Delivery June 17, 2011 Wheel Drive SUV equipped $47,814.00 September 5, with " police package or 2011 "s ecial services package" Co-operative tender for Supply, Delivery & Application of Liquid Calcium/Magnesium Chloride Host: Town of Whitby Ongoing T-539-2010 Participants: Region of Various unit operating costs May 16, 2011 Durham, Ajax, Whitby, prices 2011/2012 Oshawa, Pickering, Clarington, Scugog; Vendor: Miller Paving Year 2 of 3 Report CST 30-11 September 12, 2011 Subject: Formal Quotations - Quarterly Report for Information Page 4 3 Reference No. Description Award Status Award' Date Co-operative tender for Delivery of Sodium Chloride Host: Region of Durham Participants: Region of Durham, Ajax, Whitby, Various unit Ongoing T-279-2010 Oshawa, Pickering, operating costs May 16, 2011 Clarington, Scugog, City of prices 2011/2012 Peterborough, County of Peterborough, Uxbridge Vendor: T.H. Forsythe Year 2 of 3 Co-operative tender for Supply & Delivery of Sodium Chloride Host: Region of Durham Participants: Region of T-280-2010 Durham, Ajax, Whitby, Various unit Ongoing June 27, 2011 Oshawa, Pickering, prices operating costs Clarington, Scugog, City of 2011/2012 Peterborough, County of Peterborough, Uxbridge Vendor: Canadian Salt Co. Year 2 of 3 Co-operative tender for Supply & Delivery of Flake Calcium Chloride Host: -Town of Whitby T-539-201 0 Participants:. Region of Various unit Ongoing June 27, 2011 Durham, Ajax, Whitby, prices operating costs Oshawa, Pickering, 2011/2012 Clarington, Scugog Vendor: Innovative Surface Solutions Canada Year 2 of 3 Co-operative tender for Inspection & Testing of Aerial Trucks C2010-013 Host: City of Oshawa Various unit Ongoing June 27, 2011 Participants: Ajax, Whitby, prices operating costs Oshawa, Pickering, 2011/2012 Clarington Vendor: Halton Inspections Year 2 of 3 I Report CST 30-11 September 12, 2011 Subject: Formal Quotations - Quarterly Report for Information Page 5 37 Reference No. Description Award Status` Award Date Co-operative tender for Inspection & Testing of Pumper Trucks Host: City of Oshawa Various Ongoing June 27, 2, 2011 Participants: Ajax, Whitby, prices unit operating costs June 2 Oshawa, Pickering, 2011/2012 Clarington Vendor: Carrier Centers Year 2 of 3 Co-operative quotation for Lamps & Ballasts Host: Durham District School Board Q10-04 Participants: Durham District Various unit Ongoing June 27, 2011 School Board , Region of prices operating costs Durham, Ajax, Whitby, 2011/2012 Oshawa, Pickering, Clarington Vendor: O'Neil Electric Year 2 of 3 Co-operative proposal for Shredding Services Host: Municipality of Clarington Participants: Durham District Ongoing RFP 2009-2 School Board , Region of Various unit June 27, 2011 Durham, Durham Regional prices operating costs Policy Services, Ajax, Whitby, 2011/2012 Oshawa, Pickering, Clarington, Uxbridge Vendor: Super Shred Year 2 of 3 Report CST 30-11 September 12, 2011 Subject: Formal Quotations - Quarterly Report for Information Page 6 Attachments: Not applicable Prep red By: Approved/Endorsed By: era A. rliI emacher Gillis A. Paterson, CMA Manager, upply & Services Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer CSMSP, CPPO, CPP13, C.P.M., CMM III Recommended for the consideration of Pickering /Oly Coun 23, toll Tony PrcVv edel, P. Eng. Chief Administrative Officer M " Report To Executive Committee PICKERING Report Number: CST 32-11 Date: September 12, 2011 39 From: Gillis A. Paterson Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer Subject: Municipal Performance Measurement Program - Provincially Mandated Public Reporting of Performance Measures Recommendation: That Report CST 32-11 of the Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer be received for information. Executive Summary: The City is mandated by the Province of Ontario to report on Performance Measures for specific key service areas. The collection and reporting of these efficiency and effectiveness measures is derived from the Financial Information Return filed by the City with the Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing. These measurements are being submitted and reported by the Treasurer under the direction of Provincial authority. Each year, measures for reporting are refined, altered and added on to, making year over year comparisons difficult. For example, in 2008 all municipalities had to report on 28 measures. Effective 2009, this was increased to 49 measures. Attached are the Municipal Performance Measurement Program (MPMP) results for 2010, together with a supplemental information package that will be made available on the City's website, a comparison to the 2009 measures, if applicable, and a copy of the Public Notice that will appear in the News Advertiser at the end of September 2011. Financial Implications: This report does not contain any financial implications. Sustainability Implications: The measures reported herein will aid Council, staff, the public and the Province to analyze and assess the following: • Costs of various services, • Changes on each measures over the years, and • Service areas for review and improvement. These measures are important and useful in assisting and analyzing our service delivery to meet our corporate priorities and best practices. Report CST 32-11 September 12, 2011 Subject: 2010 Municipal Performance Measurement Program Page 2 Background: Attachment 1 is the information mandated by the Province to be reported to the public by September 30, 2011. The set of information required for reporting changes every year as identified by the Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing. Comments pertaining to the compilation and interpretation of the data have been included to aid in the explanation and understanding of what is being reported. Every year, these measures continue to evolve as existing ones are revised and new ones added as feedback from municipalities are received and taken into consideration by the Province. In addition, there are continuous refinements to the way measures are defined and calculated, especially in the areas of Roadways, Parks, Recreation and more recently in Fire prevention, where new and modified measures are being reported in recent years.. Municipalities also continue to improve on their methods of data collection in an attempt to ensure consistency in reporting. This leads to improving the measures to better serve the interests of the public and municipal needs for evaluating the efficiency and effectiveness of the services we provide in the municipality. However, caution must still be taken against municipality-to-municipality comparisons due to the fact that no two municipalities are identical in their geography, rural vs. urban mix, the level of service provided and treatment of information for data collection. It will only be through continuing efforts, ongoing experience, further clarifications from the Province and consistent reporting formulas that year-to-year comparisons within the municipality and across municipalities will become meaningful. The resulting measures will be posted on the City's website, as was the case in past years, and a notice to this effect, per Attachment 3, will be included in the "Community Page" of the local newspaper. The information will also be available to anyone wishing to pick up a copy at City Hall. Attachments: 1. 2010 Provincial Performance Measurement Program - Public Reporting 2. Comparison of 2010 and 2009, Performance Measures, 3. Public Notice to be included in the Community Page of the News Advertiser Prepared By: Approved/Endorsed By: Dennis P. Arboleda Gillis A. Paterson, C Supervisor, Accounting Services Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer Copy: Chief Administrative Officer Report CST 32-11 September 12, 2011 Subject: 2010 Municipal Performance Measurement Program Page 3 41 Recommended for the consideration of Pickering City Council ri VAee 26, Zo lI Tony Prevedel, P.Eng. Chief Administrative Officer ATTACHMENT #-1-T0 REPORT #3Z' 4 2 City of Pickering Year 2010 Performance Measurement Report Overview As required by the Ontario Government's Municipal Performance Measurement Program (MPMP), the Treasurer of the City of Pickering, as part of its 2010 Financial Information Return (FIR) package, has submitted financial and related service performance measurements to the Province. This program was announced in 2000 by the Ontario Government, which requires municipalities to collect data on measures of effectiveness and efficiency in key service areas and report these measures to the Province and the Public. The objectives of the Province are: to enhance local government transparency and accountability by reporting specific measures to the taxpayers; to increase taxpayers awareness on service plans, standards and costs at the municipal level; to improve local service delivery by sharing best practices with comparable municipalities and provide municipalities with useful data to make informed local service level decisions while optimizing available resources. As municipalities change and grow, its citizens expect to receive quality, cost effective services. Performance measurements are a means of benchmarking these services that will allow the City to- review and improve their delivery. Existing measures are continuously refined and new measures are introduced depending on the value and importance for public information. In reporting the results to the public, each measure is accompanied by comments regarding aspects of the measurement. The comments are an integral part in the interpretation of the performance measure results. These results should not be compared across municipalities without consideration on the comments that impact the interpretation and understanding of individual results. In addition, influencing factors in the collection of data or refinements while the measures are still evolving could affect the current year's results and the year over year comparability. Starting with the 2009 reporting year, efficiency measures based on Total Costs per Unit are to be reported to the public. Total Costs are calculated as the sum of Operating Costs, Interest on Long Term Debt and Amortization of related capital assets. The Total Costs per Unit measure add an important dimension to efficiency measures by including capital costs and interest on long term debt. New for 2010, all Total Costs per unit measures will net out Revenue from Other Municipalities related to Tangible Capital Assets (inputs on Schedule 12). This was previously reported in Schedule 52 prior to 2009 but was discontinued thereafter. In 2010 for the City of Pickering, no revenues were received from other municipalities related to capital assets. Hence, all measures affected by this change in 2010 should be comparable to 2009. City of Pickering Year 2010 Performance Measurement Report 3 Also new for 2010, the formula for Operating Costs for paved roads in calculating efficiency (Schedule 91) has been changed to net out revenue received from utilities for utility cut repairs. This change should provide a more accurate picture of expenses on the maintenance of municipal roads. However, no revenue was received by the City in 2010 from utilities as all utility cut repairs were done by the utilities themselves. For the calculation of measures pertaining to a per person or per 1,000 persons bases, the City population in 2010 was 93,315 compared to 92,950 in 2009. I City of Pickering 4 4 Year 2010 Performance Measurement Report General Government 1.1a Operating Costs for Governance and Corporate Management 2010 2009 7.90% 7.00% Efficiency Measure Operating costs for governance and corporate management as a percentage of total municipal operating costs. Objective To determine the efficiency of municipal management. General Comments The following factors can influence the above results: • The extent that cost centers within municipalities directly relate to the functions included under the governance and corporate management categories. • The level of service provided to the corporation and the public. Detailed Comments Calculation of this measure includes the total of the operating costs for governance, corporate management and related allocation from program support expenditures net of tax write-offs over total municipal operating costs. Note that 2010 was a municipal election year and related costs have contributed to the increase in governance and corporate operating expenses. Also, the implementation of the harmonized sales tax may have increased overall expenses on items that were previously charged only with the GST. City of Pickering Year 2010 Performance Measurement Report 45 General Government 1.1b Total Costs for Governance and Corporate Management 2010 2009 6.80% 6.00% Efficiency Measure Total costs for governance and corporate management as a percentage of total municipal costs. Objective To determine the efficiency of municipal management. General Comments The following factors can influence the above results: • The extent that cost centers within municipalities directly relate to the functions -included under the governance and corporate management categories. • The level of service provided to the corporation and the public. Detailed Comments Calculation of this measure includes the total operating costs for governance and corporate management, related interest on long term debt and amortization net of revenue received from other municipalities on tangible capital assets over total municipal cost. The increase from 6.0% in 2009 to 6.8% in 2010 was driven by the increase in related operating costs identified on the previous measure.. 4 6 City of Pickering Year 2010 Performance Measurement Report Fire Services 2.1a Operating Costs for Fire Services 2010 2009 $1.36 $1.43 Efficiency Measure Operating costs for fire services per $1,000 of assessment.. Objective Provide efficient municipal fire services. General Comments The following factors can influence the above results across municipalities: • Emergency response times • Number and location of fire halls Urban/rural mix of properties as well as density of buildings • Geographic size of municipality Detailed Comments Assessment value does not necessarily correlate to operating cost for fire services. The higher the assessment value, the lower the cost per $1,000 assessment. Conversely the urban/rural mix of the community affects the results as do the size and type of commercial/industrial establishments within the municipality. Number of households, response time and urban/rural mix of the municipality are factors that determine the need for fire services and not necessarily property value. Although there was a slight increase in operating expenses from 2009, the decrease in the 2010 measure was primarily due to the increase in the value of property assessment (denominator) from 2009. . City of Pickering 4 7 Year 2010 Performance Measurement Report Fire Services 2.1 b Total Costs for Fire Services 2010 2009 $1.43 $1.50 Efficiency Measure Total costs for fire services per $1,000 of assessment. Objective Provide efficient municipal fire services. General Comments The following factors can influence the above results across municipalities: • Emergency response times • Number and location of fire halls • Urban/rural mix of properties as well as density of buildings • Geographic size of municipality • Capital costs and interest on long term debt Detailed Comments The numerator in the calculation of this measure adds interest on long term debt and amortization to the total operating costs for Fire Services. However, like in the previous measure, the assessment value as denominator does not necessarily correlate to the total cost for fire services. The higher the assessment value, the lower the cost per $1,000 assessment. Conversely the urban/rural mix of the community affects the results as with the size and type of commercial/industrial establishments. Number of households, response time and urban/rural mix of the municipality are key factors that determine the need for fire services and not necessarily the property value. The slight decrease in the resulting measure for 2010 was primarily due to the increase in total property assessment value from 2009. 43 City of Pickering Year 2010 Performance Measurement Report Fire Services 2.2 Residential Fire Related Civilian Injuries 2010 2009 0.00 0.00 Effectiveness Measure Number of residential fire related civilian injuries per 1,000 persons. Objective Minimize the number of civilian injuries in residential fires. General Comments The following factors can influence the above results across municipalities: • Number of residential fires Emergency response times • Number and location of fire halls • Geographic size of municipality Detailed Comments This measure presents the total number of residential fire related. civilian injuries as reported by the fire department to the Office of the Fire Marshal (OFM) in the OFM Standard Incident Report. In 2010, no residential fire related civilian injury was reported to the OFM. I 49 City of Pickering Year 2010 Performance Measurement Report Fire Services 2.3 Residential Fire Related Civilian Injuries - 5 Year Average 2010 2009 0.021 0.065 Effectiveness Measure Total number of residential fire related civilian injuries averaged over 5 years from 2006 to 2010 per 1,000 persons. Objective Minimize the number of civilian injuries in residential fires. General Comments The following factors can influence the above results across municipalities: • Number of residential fires • Emergency response times • Number and location of fire halls • Geographic size of municipality Detailed Comments This measure presents the number of residential fire related civilian injuries as reported by the fire department to the Office of the Fire Marshal (OFM) in the OFM Standard Incident Report from 2006 to 2010 averaged over 5 years per 1,000 persons. The fire department reported an average of two residential fire related civilian injuries to the OFM per year from 2006 to 2010. However, with no injuries being reported in 2009 and 2010, the five year average has decreased substantially. City of Pickering 5 0 Year 2010 Performance Measurement Report Fire Services 2.4 Residential Fire Related Civilian Fatalities 2010 2009 0.000 0.011 Effectiveness Measure Number of residential fire related civilian fatalities per 1,000 persons. Objective Minimize the number of civilian fatalities in residential fires. General Comments The following factors can influence the above results across municipalities: • Number of residential fires • Emergency response times • Number and location of fire halls • Geographic size of municipality Detailed Comments This measure presents the number of residential fire related civilian fatalities as determined by the Office of the Fire Marshal (OFM) per 1,000 persons. In 2010, no residential fire related civilian fatality was reported to the OFM. City of Pickering 5 Year 2010 Performance Measurement Report Fire Services 2.5 Residential Fire Related Civilian Fatalities - 5 Year Average 2010 2009 0.011 0.011 Effectiveness Measure Number of residential fire related civilian fatalities averaged over 5 years per 1,000 persons. Objective Minimize the number of civilian fatalities in residential fires. General Comments The following factors can influence the above results across municipalities: • Number of residential fires • Emergency response times • Number and location of fire halls • Geographic size, of municipality Detailed Comments This measure presents the total number of residential fire related civilian fatalities as determined by the Office of the Fire Marshal (OFM) from 2006 to 2010 averaged over 5 years per 1,000 persons. The average residential fire related civilian fatality per year for 5 years from 2006 to 2010 is one, as reported to the OFM. This translates to 0.011 per 1,000 persons, the same result in 2009. 5 2 City of Pickering Year 2010 Performance Measurement Report Fire Services 2.6 Number of Residential Structural Fires 2010 2009 1.068 0.875 Effectiveness Measure Number of residential structural fires per 1,000 households. Objective Minimize the number of residential structural fires. General Comments The following factors can influence the above results across municipalities: • Number of residential fires • Emergency response times • Number and location of fire halls • Geographic size of municipality Detailed Comments This measure presents the total number of residential structural fires and explosions reported by the fire department to the Office of the Fire Marshal (OFM) in the OFM Standard Incident Report per 1,000 households. In 2010, there were 32 residential structural fires and explosions reported by the fire department to the OFM. Three more than what was reported in 2009. This increased the resulting measure per 1,000 persons to 1.068, or 22% from 0.875 in 2009. City of Pickering 5 3 Year 2010 Performance Measurement Report Road Services 4.1a Operating Costs for Paved Roads 2010 2009 $1,814.61 $1,958.98 Efficiency Measure Revised Measure - Operating costs for paved (hard top) roads per lane kilometre. Objective Provide efficient maintenance of paved roads. General Comments The following factors can influence the above results across municipalities: • Use of roads by heavy equipment. • The municipality's standard for road conditions in comparison with comparable municipalities. • Kilometres of paved roads in the municipality. • The method of allocating overhead costs (such as office supplies, telephone, advertising, subscriptions, insurance, general repairs and maintenance, other . indirect costs) used in the determination of the numerator when there is not a separate cost centre. Detailed Comments Paved (hard top) roads include roads with asphalt surface, concrete surface, composite pavement, Portland cement or surface treatment. The identified costs attributable to this measure include related employee wages & benefits, road materials, contracted services, program support, rental of heavy equipment and shoulder maintenance. The City of Pickering maintains separate accounts to track material costs related to roads. However, the costs for administration and other indirect costs have been allocated to the cost for paved roads based on management's best estimate of the proportion of responsibility dedicated to the road functions such as maintenance of paved and unpaved roads and winter control. In 2010, the calculation of the operating costs was revised to net out revenue from utilities for utility cut repairs. However, utilities repair their own road cuts after completing all intended works so no related revenues are being collected by the City. The decrease in the resulting measure for 2010 can be attributed to the decrease in the volume of purchased materials compared to 2009. With the continuous and expeditious repairs done on existing paved roadways, cost of maintenance are reduced accordingly. The City maintained a total of 704 kilometres of paved roads in 2010 compared to 703 kilometres in 2009. 5 4 City of Pickering Year 2010 Performance Measurement Report Road Services 4.1 b Total Costs for Paved Roads 2010 2009 $5,574.86 $6,155.67 Efficiency Measure Revised Measure - Total costs for paved (hard top) roads per lane kilometre. Objective Provide efficient maintenance of paved roads. General Comments The following factors can influence the above results across municipalities: • Use of roads by heavy equipment. • The municipality's standard for road conditions in comparison with comparable municipalities. • Kilometres of paved roads in the municipality. • The method of allocating overhead costs (such as office supplies, telephone, advertising, subscriptions, insurance, general repairs and maintenance, other indirect costs) used in the determination of the numerator when there is not a separate cost centre. • Interest on long term debt and amortization on capital costs. • Revenue received from other municipalities related to tangible capital assets. Detailed Comments The total cost is calculated by adding the calculated operating costs, interest on long term debt and amortization net of revenue received from other municipalities related to tangible capital assets. Although no related revenue was received in 2010, the decrease in the calculation for 2010 was largely due to the decrease in the volume of purchased materials and a decrease in amortization amount on tangible capital assets compared to 2009. The decrease in related costs reported on the previous measure translates to a decrease in the resulting total cost measure. The City maintained 704 kilometres of paved road in 2010 compared to 7.03 kilometres in 2009. City of Pickering Year 2010 Performance Measurement Report 55 Road Services 4.2a Operating Costs for Unpaved Roads 2010 2009 $5,188.99 $5,237.12 Efficiency Measure Operating costs for unpaved (loose top) roads per lane kilometre. Objective Provide efficient maintenance of unpaved roads. General Comments The following factors can influence the above results across municipalities: • Use of the roads by heavy equipment. • The kilometres of unpaved roads in the municipality 'in comparison with comparable municipalities. • . Locations of the unpaved roads. • The method of allocating overhead costs (that includes office supplies, telephone, advertising, subscriptions, insurance, general repairs and maintenance, other indirect costs) used in the determination of the numerator when there is not a . separate cost centre. Detailed Comments Unpaved (loose top) roads include roads with gravel, stone or other loose surface. The City of Pickering maintains separate accounts to track material costs related to roads. However, the cost for administration and other indirect costs have been allocated to the cost of unpaved roads based on management's best estimate of the proportion or responsibility dedicated to the road functions such as maintenance of paved and unpaved roads and winter control. The operating costs of maintaining the City's unpaved roads include employee wages & benefits, amount granular materials, administering calcium programs, program support, contracted services, rental of heavy equipment, grading, wash out repair and shoulder maintenance. In 2010, the City used less granular materials on many unpaved roads due to lesser than usual washouts in the spring reducing expenditures. The City maintained 214 kilometres of unpaved lanes in the reporting year compared to 216 in 2009. City of Pickering 5 6 Year 2010 Performance Measurement Report Road Services 4.2b Total Costs for Unpaved Roads 2010 2009 $5,243.48 $5,295.11 Efficiency Measure Total costs for unpaved (loose top) roads per lane kilometre. Objective Provide efficient maintenance of unpaved roads. General Comments The following factors can influence the above results across municipalities: • Use of the roads by heavy equipment. • The kilometres of unpaved roads in the municipality in comparison with comparable municipalities. • Locations of the unpaved lanes. • The method of allocating overhead costs (that includes office supplies, telephone, advertising, subscriptions, insurance, general repairs and maintenance, other indirect costs) used in the determination of the numerator when there is not a separate cost centre. • Interest on long term debt and amortization on capital costs. Detailed Comments Calculation of total costs include the sum of the total operating cost, interest on long term debt and amortization on capital costs net of revenue received from other municipalities related to tangible capital assets over 214 kilometres of unpaved lanes maintained in 20.10. The decrease in 2010 from 2009 was reflective of the decrease in the operating.costs calculated from the previous measure. City of Pickering 5 Year 2010 Performance Measurement Report Road Services 4.3a Operating Costs for Bridges and Culverts 2010 2009 $0.00 $0.00 Efficiency Measure .Operating costs for bridges and culverts per square metre of surface area. Objective Provide efficient maintenance of bridges and culverts. General Comments The following factors can influence the above results across municipalities: • Use of bridges and causeways. • Location of bridges and culverts. • The method of allocating overhead costs (that includes office supplies, telephone, advertising, subscriptions, insurance, general repairs and maintenance, other indirect costs) used in the determination of the numerator when there is not a separate cost centre: Detailed Comments The operating costs of maintaining the City's bridges and culverts include employees' wages and benefits, materials used for repairs & maintenance, contracted services, rental of equipment, program support less revenue from other municipalities. In 2010, the. City did not incur any operating costs related to the repairs & maintenance of bridges and culverts, as was in 2009. However, the total surface area of bridges and culverts measured in 2010 was 9,474 square metres compared to 8,599 in 2009. This increase was a result of a recent municipal bridge and culvert inspection and assessment study that provided a more accurate measure of the total surface area.of qualified bridges and culverts by definition. I City of Pickering 5 Year 2010 Performance Measurement Report Road Services 4.3b Total Costs for ridges and Culverts 2010 2009 $21.30 $24.70 • Efficiency Measure Total costs for bridges and culverts per square metre of surface area. Objective Provide efficient maintenance of bridges and culverts. General Comments The following factors can influence the above results across municipalities: • Use of bridges and causeways. • Locations of bridges and culverts. • The method of allocating overhead costs (that includes office supplies, telephone, advertising, subscriptions, insurance, general repairs and maintenance, other indirect costs) used in the determination of the numerator when there is not a separate cost centre. Detailed Comments The total costs of maintaining the City's bridges and culverts is the sum of the total operating cost, interest on long term debt and amortization less revenue from other municipalities related to tangible capital assets. The resulting measure was slightly lower by about 14% from $24.70 in 2009 to $21.30 in 2010. The decrease was largely due to the increase in the total square metres of surface area on bridges and culverts used as denominator in calculating the measure. The increase in surface area from 8,599 square metres in 2009 to 9,474 square metres in 2010 was a result of a recent bridge and culvert assessment study that provided a more accurate measure on the total surface area of qualified bridges and culverts. City of Pickering Year 2010 Performance Measurement Report 59 Road Services 4.4a Operating Costs for Winter Maintenance of Roads 2010 2009 $963.32 $1,328.15 Efficiency Measure Operating costs for winter maintenance of roadways per lane kilometre maintained in winter. Objective Provide efficient winter maintenance of roadways. General Comments i The following factors can influence the above results: • The municipality's standard service levels for road conditions. • The kilometres of paved and unpaved roads in the municipality in comparison with comparable municipalities. • The method of allocating overhead costs (that includes office supplies, travel, telephone, advertising, subscriptions, insurance, general repairs and maintenance, other indirect costs) used in the determination of the numerator when there is not a separate cost centre. Detailed Comments Since 2004 the City of Pickering has maintained a separate account to track material costs that are directly related to winter control of roadways. The costs for administration and other indirect costs however have been allocated based on management's best estimate of the proportion of responsibility dedicated to the road function for winter control. The total operating cost of the City's winter control maintenance includes related employee wages & benefits, salt, sand & other materials, program support, equipment rental and culvert thawing. The decrease in costs of winter maintenance on roads from 2009 was due to the lesser intensity of winter events experienced in 2010. This resulted in less use of de-icing materials and related staff overtime. The City maintained 918 kilometres of lanes during the winter season. 6 City of Pickering Year 2010 Performance Measurement Report Road Services 4.4b Total Costs for Winter Maintenance of Roads 2010 2009 $963.32 $1,328.15 Efficiency Measure Total costs for winter maintenance of roadways per lane kilometre maintained in winter. Objective Provide efficient winter control operation. General Comments The following factors can influence the above results: • The municipality's standard service levels for road conditions. • The kilometres of paved and unpaved roads in the municipality in comparison with comparable municipalities. • The method of allocating overhead costs (that includes office supplies, travel, telephone, advertising, subscriptions, insurance, general repairs and maintenance, other indirect costs) used in the determination of the numerator when there is not a separate cost centre. Detailed Comments The total cost for winter maintenance of roads is calculated as the sum of the total operating cost, interest on long term debt and amortization on related assets net of revenue from other municipalities related to tangible capital assets. In 2010, there was no interest and amortization costs for equipment related to winter maintenance of roadways. Therefore, the resulting measure is the same as the calculated result showing on the operating costs for winter maintenance of roads (see 4.4a). City of Pickering Year 2010 Performance Measurement Report 61 Road Services 4.5 Adequacy of Roads 2010 2009 866% 84.9% Effectiveness Measure Percentage of paved lane kilometres where the condition is rated as good to very good. Objective Provide a paved road'system that has a pavement condition that meets municipal. standards. General Comments The following factors can influence the above results: • The municipality's standard service levels for road conditions. • The kilometres of paved roads in the municipality in comparison with comparable municipalities. • Volume of traffic. Detailed Comments City staff uses their best estimates to establish the percentage of roads that are rated as good to very good. The City's road patrols, the public, employees and the Roads Needs Study are other sources providing feedback on road conditions. As existing roads are reconstructed, repaired and rehabilitated, the rating improves to a higher level year over year. In 2010, 610 out of 704' kilometres (86.6%) of paved lane was rated to be in good to very good condition as compared to 597 out of 703 kilometres (84.9%) in 2009. 6 2 City of Pickering Year 2010 Performance Measurement Report Road Services 4.6 Adequacy of Brid es and Culverts 2010 2009 73.1% 64.8% Effectiveness Measure Percentage of bridges and culverts where the condition is rated as good to very good. Objective Maintain safe bridges and culverts. General Comments The following factors can influence the above results across municipalities: • Use of bridges and causeways. • Maintenance of bridges and causeways as required to meet standards. • Locations of bridges and culverts. Detailed Comments The condition of a bridge or culvert in this performance measure means the condition of only the primary components which are the main load carrying components of the structure. This includes: decks, beams, girders, abutments, foundations, etc. Any other components used to distribute loads such as sidewalks, curbs, sway braces and wingwalls are excluded. In 2010, a municipal bridge and culvert inspection and assessment study was conducted which provided more accurate information on all bridges and culverts within the City. A total of 38 bridges and culverts were rated as good to very good out of 52 (73.1 compared to 35 out of 54 (64.8%) in 2009. The total count was reduced from what was reported in 2009 as it was determined that two railway bridges previously ` included were not the City's responsibility. City of Pickering Year 2010 Performance Measurement Report 63 Road Services 4.7 Winter Event Response 2010 2009 100% 100% Effectiveness Measure Percentage of winter events where the response met or exceeded locally determined road municipal service levels for road maintenance. Objective Provide an appropriate response to winter storm events. General Comments The following factors can influence the above results: • The municipality's standard service levels for road conditions. • The frequency and severity of the winter weather. • The kilometres of paved and unpaved roads in the municipality in comparison with comparable municipalities. • Hours of Service regulations under the Highway Traffic Act. Detailed Comments Roads are cleaned and cleared usually within 24 hours of a snowfall when adequate resources are available in accordance with hours of service regulations. In 2010, the City did- not experience' a winter event where staff was not able to meet or exceed road maintenance standards. The City responded to 27 winter storm events in 2010 compared to 19 in 2009. All responses met or exceeded the municipal standard winter control maintenance levels. However, note that although there were more winter events in 2010, most were not as intense as compared to those experienced in 2009. City of Pickering 6 4 Year 2010 Performance Measurement Report Storm Water Management 7.1a Operating Costs for Urban Storm.Water Management 2010 2009 $1,617.07 $1,502.89 Efficiency Measure Operating costs for urban storm water management (collection, treatment, and disposal) per kilometre of drainage system. Objective Provide efficient storm water management. General Comments The following factors can influence the efficiency rate of urban storm water management: • The geography of the City • The extent and age of the drainage system • The inventory of pipes in the Municipality Detailed Comments Storm-water management has become increasingly important in the urban area as the City continues to develop and intensify. Impacts such as flooding, erosion and poor water quality are being addressed through watershed wide controls thus reducing the pressures that are put on watercourses and Frenchman's Bay. This performance measure identifies direct costs related to the efficient collection, treatment and conveyance of stormwater from urban areas against total kilometres of urban drainage systems. Direct costs include salaries/wages/benefits, contracted services and materials, storm pipe cleaning, flushing, video inspection, catch basin/manhole repairs, storm pipe repairs, cleaning of specialized oil and grit separators. The City maintained 295 km of urban drainage system in 2010, the same as what was maintained in 2009. The operating cost increase in the resulting,measure for 2010 from 2009 was largely due to the increase in staff salaries/wages/benefits. City of Pickering b Year 2010 Performance Measurement Report Storm Water Management 7.1b Total Costs for Urban Storm Water Management 2010 2009 $8,289.91 $8,011.91 Efficiency Measure Total costs for urban storm water management (collection, treatment, and disposal) per kilometre of drainage system. Objective Provide efficient storm water management. General Comments The following factors can influence the efficiency rate of urban storm water management: • The geography of the City • The extent and age of the drainage system • The inventory of pipes in the Municipality Detailed Comments This measure sums the total operating costs for urban storm water management, interest on long term debt and amortization on urban storm capital assets over total kilometres of urban drainage system plus 0.005 kilometre on the total number of catch basins. This provides us the picture of how much was spent in the complete management of our urban storm water systems on a per kilometre bases. The City maintained 295 km of urban drainage system in 2010, the same as in 2009. An increase in the 2010 amortization costs related to capital assets resulted to an increase in the resulting measure from 2009. 6 6 City of Pickering Year 2010 Performance Measurement Report Storm Water Management 7.2a Operating Costs for Rural Storm Water Management 2010 2009 $2,744.23 $2,308.05 Efficiency Measure Operating costs for rural storm water management (collection, treatment, and disposal) per kilometre of drainage system. Objective Provide efficient rural storm water management. General Comments The following factors can influence the efficiency rate of rural storm water management: • The geography, size and nature of the rural area. • Land erosion control. • The frequency and time devoted to the maintenance of the rural drainage system. Detailed Comments A rural stormwater system is one where stormwater is conveyed primarily along side of roadways normally with open ditches located in areas defined as rural Pickering's Official Plan. A rural system may also storm sewers and catch basins. The total operating cost sums up all related salaries/wages/benefits, contracted services, materials, other direct costs such as culvert repairs and maintenance, ditching, bank repair and other day-to-day maintenance measures, rentals, interfunctional adjustments and program support over the total kilometres of drainage system. The 351 km of rural drainage system in 2009 remained unchanged in 2010. The operating cost increase in the resulting measure for 2010 from 2009 was largely due to the increase in staff salaries/wages/benefits. City of Pickering 6 7 Year 2010 Performance Measurement Report Storm Water Management 7.2b Total Costs for Rural'Storm Water Management 2010 2009 $2,805.46 $2,369.96 Efficiency Measure Total costs for rural storm water management (collection, treatment, and disposal) per kilometre of drainage system. Objective Provide efficient rural storm water management. General Comments The following factors can influence the efficiency rate of rural storm water management: • The geography, size and nature of the rural area. • Land erosion control. • The frequency and time devoted to the maintenance of the rural drainage system. • Interest on long term debt and amortization. Detailed Comments This measure calculates the sum of operating costs, interest on long term debt and related amortization for rural storm water management over total kilometres of rural drainage system plus 0.005 kilometres times the number of catch basins. It provides a picture of how much was spent in maintaining a rural drainage system on a per kilometre basis. The City maintained a total of 351 km of rural drainage system in both 2009 and 2010. The difference in the resulting measure was from the increase in operating costs as calculated in the previous measure (7.2a). 68 City of Pickering Year 2010 Performance Measurement Report Parks and Recreation 10.1a Operating Cost for Parks per Person 2010 2009 $41.49 $43.94 Efficiency Measure Operating costs for maintaining the parks per person. Objective Provide efficient operation of parks. General Comments Operating costs in maintaining outdoor open spaces including parks, parkettes, flower gardens, natural areas, playgrounds, public squares, skateboard parks, outdoor skating rinks, sports fields, splash pads, trails and similar spaces are included in the determination of this measure. To calculate this measure, the total operating cost is divided by the total City population. Detailed Comments i The City maintains the parks on a daily basis during summer. The scheduled grass cutting cycle of 5 to 10 days is maintained to control growth and keep all parks available and safe for public use at all times during the summer months. However, the amount of precipitation received during this time directly affects the grass cutting cycle. - With a relatively drier summer experienced in 2010, costs of materials and contracted services were less compared to 2009. This resulted to a slightly lower operating cost per person in 2010. The increase in population also contributed to the decrease" in the resulting measure. City of Pickering Year 2010 Performance Measurement Report 69 Parks and Recreation 10.1 b Total Cost for Parks per Person 20,10 2009 $50.59 $52.92 Efficiency Measure, Total costs for maintaining the parks per person. Objective Provide efficient operations of parks. I Detailed Comments Calculation of this measure totals the operating costs, interest on long term debt and amortization on capital assets related to parks divided by the total population. This measure provides a picture of how much the City spent in maintaining the parks on a per person basis in 2010. The slight decrease in the calculated measure was. largely due to the increase in total population (denominator). 7 City of Pickering Year 2010 Performance Measurement Report Parks and Recreation 10.2a Operating Costs for Recreation Programs per Person 2010 2009 $47.76 $45.12 Efficiency Measure Operating costs for recreation programs per person. Objective Provide efficient operation of recreation programs. Detailed Comments Recreation programs include a wide range of programs, services and activities offered by the City to the public. The measure is calculated by dividing the total operating cost with total population. Total operating cost in running the programs includes salaries, wages, benefits, materials, contracted services, rents, transfers and adjustments. Existing recreation programs are continuously reviewed and changed depending on public demand. New programs were also introduced in 2010 with the availability of additional recreation space from the 2009 recreation complex expansion. Seasonality of activities also affects the type and frequency of program offerings. City of Pickering 7 1 Year 2010 Performance Measurement Report Parks and Recreation 10.2b Total Costs for Recreation Programs per Person 2010 2009 $47.76 $45.12 Efficiency Measure Total cost for the operation of recreation programs per person. Objective Provide efficient operation of recreation programs. Detailed Comments The total cost is calculated as the sum of operating costs, interest on long term debt and amortization related to recreation programs. In 2010, no interest and amortization related to recreation programs were allocated hence the total costs per person is the same as the operating cost per person reported in 10.2a above. I City of Pickering 7 2 Year 2010 Performance Measurement Report Parks and Recreation 10.3a Operating Costs for Recreation Facilities per Person 2010 2009 $86.44 $80.81 Efficiency Measure Operating costs for recreation facilities per person. Objective Provide efficient operation of recreation facilities. Detailed Comments Recreation facilities include built or enclosed structures used for the purposes of community recreation and leisure. These facilities normally involve some form of operating function either, mechanical, electrical or both and some form of controlled access. Recreation facilities include community centres, gymnasiums, arenas, fitness centres, indoor skating rinks, indoor and outdoor swimming pools, lawn bowling greens, tennis courts, youth/senior centres, wading pools, etc. Included in the calculation of this measure are salaries/wages/benefits, materials, contracted services, rents, transfers and adjustments related to the operation of all recreation facilities, divided by total population. Cost of repairs and maintenance and overall use of materials increase as existing facilities age over the years. The additional maintenance costs and staff salaries to run new programs related to the 2009 recreation complex expansion contributed to the slight increase in the calculated measure. City of Pickering Year 2010 Performance Measurement Report 73 Parks and Recreation 10.3b Total Costs for Recreation Facilities per Person 2010 2009 $99.62 $93.20 Efficiency Measure. Total cost for recreation facilities per person. Objective Provide efficient operation of the City's recreation facilities. Detailed Comments Total cost include operating costs, interest on long term debt and amortization tangible capital assets related to the operation of all recreation facilities. In 2010, an increase in the amortization expense resulted to an increase in the calculation of this measure. 'I City of Pickering 7 4 Year 2010 Performance Measurement Report Parks and Recreation' 10.4a Operating Costs for Recreation Programs and Recreation Facilities per Person Subtotal 2010 2009 $134:20 $125.93 Efficiency Measure Operating costs for recreation programs and recreation facilities per person. Objective Provide efficient operation of the City's programs and recreation facilities. Detailed Comments Included in this measure is the cost of salaries/wages/benefits and all other related direct costs in the operation of recreational programs and facilities. The facility expansion at the recreation complex in 2009 has afforded the continued introduction of more programs that directly contributed to the increase in operating costs for both programs and facilities in 2010. Repairs and maintenance related expenses including labour, contracted services and materials also contributed to the increase in 2010. City of Pickering Year 2010 Performance Measurement Report 75 Parks and Recreation 10.4b Total Costs for Recreation Programs and Recreation Facilities per Person Subtotal 2'010 2009 $147.38 $138.32 Efficiency Measure Total costs for recreation programs and recreation facilities per person. Objective Provide efficient operation of the City's programs and recreation facilities Detailed Comments Total costs include the operating costs calculated in 10.4a above plus interest on long term debt and amortization related to the operation of recreation programs and maintenance of facilities. An increase in amortization in 2010 resulted to an increase in the calculated measure compared to 2009. i 7 6 City of Pickering Year 2.010 Performance Measurement Report Parks and Recreation 10.5 Total Kilometres of Trails per 1,000 Persons 2010 2009 0.171 km 0.161 km Effectiveness Measure Kilometres of trails per 1,000 persons Objective Measure the effectiveness of trails in the City that provide recreation opportunities. Detailed Comments Total kilometres of trails owned by the City plus trails owned by third parties where the City has a formal lease contract, joint use agreement or reciprocal use agreement for every 1,000 residents were used in the calculation of this measure. The 16 kilometres of trail maintained by the City in 2010 increased by a kilometre from 15 kilometres in 2009 due to additional construction in 2010. City of Pickering Year 2010 Performance Measurement Report 77 Parks and Recreation 10.6 Hectares of Open Space and Hectares of Open Space per 1,000 Persons 2010 2009 2.347 ha 7.639 ha Effectiveness Measure Hectares of open space (City owned) per 1,000 person. Objective Measure the adequacy of open space for the population. Detailed Comments Total hectares of City owned open space was used in this calculation. Open space includes all outdoor open spaces that provide opportunities and benefits for active, passive and programmed community recreation and leisure that are accessible to the public. This includes but not limited to allotments, horticultural areas, natural areas, parks and parkettes, playgrounds, public squares, skateboard parks, sports fields and trails. The definition of how total hectares was to be reported had changed. The total hectares previously used in the computation included areas that should have been excluded such as hydro corridors. After the appropriate changes in the determination of total hectares of open space was completed, the effective total area used in the 2010 calculation was reduced to 219 hectares compared to 710 hectares as reported in 2009. City of Pickering 7 $ Year 2010 Performance Measurement Report Parks and Recreation 10.7 Total Participant Hours for Recreation Programs 2010 2009 21,030 hrs 20,099 hrs Effectiveness Measure Total participant hours for recreation programs per 1,000 persons. Objective Measure the effectiveness of programs provided by the City. Detailed Comments Participant hours are based only on the number of active registrants or participants in a program. Hours for special events are not part of this measure. Total participant hours for every 1,000 person in the City including registered, drop-in and permitted recreation programs and activities was used in this calculation. The facility expansion in 2009 provided space that allowed an increase in the number of recreation programs offered in 2010. This resulted to an increase in the number of participant hours from drop-ins and program registrations. i i i_ City of Pickering 7 9 Year 2010 Performance Measurement Report Parks and Recreation 10.8 Square Metres of Indoor Recreation Facilities and Square Metres of Indoor Recreation Facilities per 1,000 Persons (Municipally Owned 2010 2009 437.561 sqm 439.279 s m Effectiveness Measure Square metres of indoor recreation facilities per 1,000 persons. Objective Determine the adequacy of indoor recreation facility space available to the public. Detailed Comments City owned indoor recreation facilities include built or enclosed structures used for the purposes of community recreation and leisure. The 40,831 total square metres of City owned indoor recreation facilities in 2010 was the same area reported in 2009. The slight decrease in the calculation of this measure in 2010 from 2009 was due to the increase in population (denominator). City of Pickering 8 0 Year 2010 Performance Measurement Report Parks and Recreation 10.9 Square Metres:,'of Outdoor Recreation Facility Space and Square Metres of Outdoor Recreation Facility Space per 1,000 Persons (Municipally Owned 2010 2009 284.938 sqm 286.057 sqm Effectiveness Measure Square metres of outdoor recreation facility space per 1,000 persons. Objective Determine the adequacy of outdoor recreation facility space available to the public. Detailed Comments Total area in square metres of municipally owned outdoor recreation facility space with controlled access and electrical or mechanical functions per 1,000 persons were used in this calculation. The 26,589 square metres of City owned outdoor space reported in 2010 was the same as in 2009. The slight decrease in the 2010 calculation was a result of the increase in population from 2009 (denominator). City of Pickering 8 1 Year 2010 Performance Measurement Report Library Services 11.1a Operating Costs for Libra Services per Person 2010 2009 $55.27 $54.89 Efficiency Measure Operating costs for library services per person. Objective Provide efficient library services to the public. Detailed Comments The City has five library locations servicing its residents. The cost for all five locations is included in the calculation of this measure, which includes wages, benefits, materials, rent and all other operating costs. The increase in library operating costs per person was mainly due to a slight increase in staff salaries, benefits and maintenance costs due to ageing facilities. City of Pickering 8 2 Year 2010 Performance Measurement Report Library Services 11.1 b Total Costs for "Libra Services per Person 2010 2009 $66.83 $67.45 Efficiency Measure Total ,costs for library services per person. Objective Provide efficient library services to the public. Detailed Comments Total cost for this new measure is the sum of the operating costs, interest on long term debt and amortization of related capital assets divided by total population. The resulting calculation slightly decreased in 2010 from 2009 due to the decrease in the allocation of total interest on long term debt and amortization on related capital assets. I City of Pickering Year 2010 Performance Measurement Report 83 Library Services 11.2a Operating Costs for Libra Services per Use 2010 2009 $1.76 $1.75 Efficiency Measure Operating costs for library services per use. Objective Provide efficient library services to the public. Detailed Comments The City has five locations servicing its residents. The total operating costs for all five locations and the total library uses was included in the calculation of this, measure. The resulting measure in 2010 was almost the same as in 2009. Although there was a slight. increase in total operating cost in 2010 (numerator), there was also a corresponding increase in total library uses (denominator) in the same year. 8 4 City of Pickering Year 2010 Performance Measurement Report Library Services 11.2b Total Costs for Libra Services per Use 2010. 2009 $2.13 $2.15 Efficiency Measure New Measure - Total costs for library services per use. Objective Provide efficient library services to the public. Detailed Comments The total costs for all five library locations was used in the calculation of this measure against total library uses. The total costs include the sum of the operating costs, interest on long term debt and amortization of related capital assets. The decrease in the resulting measure was due to a lower interest and amortization in 2010. City of Pickering 8 5 Year 2010 Performance Measurement Report Library Services 11.3 Libra Uses per Person 2010 2009 31.340 31.425 Effectiveness Measure Library uses per person. Objective Increased use of library services. General Comment Although population changes impact the resulting measure, it does not necessarily affect the level of service provided. Just a change in usage alone is a satisfactory indicator of service levels. Detailed Comments Total electronic and non electronic library uses from all five locations together with the total . population of the City were used in the calculation of this measure. There was a slight increase in total library usage in 2010 compared to 2009. But the resulting usage per person decreased primarily due to the increase in total population (denominator). 8 6 City of Pickering Year 2010 Performance Measurement Report Library Services 11.4 Electronic Libra Uses as a Percentage of Total Libra Uses 2010 2009 28.8% 30.0% Effectiveness Measure Electronic library uses as a percentage of total library uses. Objective Effectiveness of information on library usage. Detailed Comments The percentage of electronic uses includes data from the five library locations. Uses include the number of people using on-site library computers, number of times electronic collections (e-books, etc.) are accessed, number of electronic reference transactions, number of users of wireless connection and number of electronic visits to the library. The decrease in this measure from 2009 was attributed to a change in the method of counting the use of library computers and wireless network in 2010. City of Pickering 8 7 Year 2010 Performance Measurement Report Library Services 11.5 Non Electronic Libra Uses as a Percentage of Total Libra Uses 2010 2009 71.2% 70.0% Effectiveness Measure Non-electronic Library' uses as a percentage of total library uses. Objective Effectiveness of information on library usage. Detailed Comments The percentage of non-electronic uses includes data from the five library locations. Uses include borrowing books, program attendance, in-library materials, number of standard reference transactions and number of in-person visits to the library. From among the categories under non electronic library uses mentioned above, the increase in the resulting measure for 2010 was largely due to increase in the total number of visits made to the library in person compared to 2009. Attendance to library events and programs made this increase possible. 8 8 City of Pickering Year 2010 Performance Measurement Report Land Use Planning 12.1 Percentage of New Residential Units Located Within Settlement Areas 2010 2009 100.0% 98.2% Effectiveness Measure Percentage of new residential units located within settlement areas. Objective New residential development is occurring within settlement areas. Detailed Comments The number of new residential units in detached houses, semi-detached houses, row /town houses and apartments/condo apartments within the settlement areas are used for the calculation of this measure as a percentage of the total number of new residential units created within the entire City. Settlement areas include areas within the City which have been designated for residential development in an approved municipal official plan. In 2010, there was a total of 107 new dwelling units created within the City's designated settlement areas compared to the 56 created in 2009. This represents a 91.1 % increase in new residential units created compared to 2009. City of Pickering Year 2010 Performance Measurement Report 89 Land Use Planning 12.2 Preservation of Agricultural Lands 2010 2009 100.0% 99.7% Effectiveness Measure Percentage of land designated for agricultural purposes which was not re-designated for other uses during the reporting year. Objective Preservation of agricultural land. Detailed Comments The City of Pickering maintained 8,823 hectares of land designated for agricultural purposes in 2010. No area was re-designated to other uses in the reporting year. 9 0 City of Pickering Year 2010 Performance Measurement Report Land Use Planning 12.3 Preservation of A ricultural Lands Relative to 2000 2010 2009 99.5% 99.5% Effectiveness Measure Percentage of land designated for agricultural purposes which was not re-designated for other uses relative to the base year of 2000. Objective Preservation of agricultural land. Detailed Comments Of the 8,865 hectares of land originally designated for agricultural purposes in the official plan as of January 1, 2000, 42 hectares was re-designated since then. However, no land was re- designated in the reporting year 2010. City of Pickering Year 2010 Performance Measurement Report 91 Land Use Planning 12.4 Hectares of Agricultural Land which was Re-designated for Other Uses During the Re ortin Year 2010 2009 0 27 Effectiveness Measure Number of hectares of land originally designated for agricultural purposes which was re- designated for other uses during the reporting year. Objective Preservation of agricultural land. Detailed Comments There was no re-designation of agricultural land to other classifications in 2010. 9 2 City of Pickering Year 2010 Performance Measurement Report Land Use Planning 12.5 Hectares of Agricultural Lands which was Re-designated for Other Uses Since 2000 2010 2009 42 42 Effectiveness Measure Number of hectares of.land originally designated for agricultural purposes which was re- designated for other uses since January 1, 2000. Objective Preservation of agricultural land. Detailed Comments A total of 42 hectares of agricultural land was re-designated to other uses from 2000 to 2010. ATTACHMENT # -~LTO REPORT# 05732-11 CITY OF PICKERING PERFORMANCE MEASUREMENT COMPARISON OF 2010 & 2009 MEASURES 93 Performance Measurements 2010 2009 General Government - Efficiency Operating costs for governance and corporate management 7.90% 7.00% as % of total municipal operating costs Total Costs for governance and corporate management as % of total municipal costs 6.80% 6.00% Protection Services - Fire Services Efficiency - Operating cost for fire services per $1,000 of assessment $ 1.36 $ 1.43 - Total cost for fire services per $1,000 of assessment $ 1.43 1.50% - Number of residential fire related civilian injuries per 1,000 persons 0.00 0.00 - Residential fire related civilian injuries - 5 year average per 1,000 persons 0.021 0.065 - Residential fire related civilian fatalities per 1,000 persons in 2009 0.000 0.011 - Residential fire related civilian fatalities - 5 year average per 1,000 persons 0.011 0.011 - Number of residential structural fires per 1,000 households 1.068 0.875 Transportation Services - Roadways Efficiency - Operating cost for paved roads per lane kilometer $ . 1,814.61 $ 1,958.98 - Total cost for paved roads per lane kilometer $ 5,574.86 $ 6,155.67 - Operating cost for unpaved roads per lane kilometer $ 5,188.99 $ 5,237.12 - Total cost for unpaved roads per lane kilometer $ 5,243.48 $ 5,295.11 - Operating cost for bridges culverts per sq m of surface area $ - $ - - Total cost for bridges & culverts per sq m of surface area $ 21.30 $ 24.70 - Operating cost for winter control maintenance of roads per lane kilometer $ 963.32 $ 1,328.15 - Total cost for winter control maintenance of roads per lane kilometer $ 963.32 ` $ 1,328.15 Tranportation Services - Roadways Effectiveness - Percentage of paved lane kilometer rated as good to very good 86.60% 84.90% - Percentage of bridges & culverts rated as good to very good 73.10% 64.81% - Percentage of winter event response that met or exceeded set standards 100.00% 100.00% Environmental Services - Storm Water System Efficiency - Operating costs for urban storm water management (collection, treatment and disposal) per kilometer of drainage system (URBAN) $ 1,617.07 $ 1,502.89 - Total costs for urban storm.water management (collection, treatment and disposal) per kilometer of drainage system (URBAN) $ 8,289.91 $ 8,011.91 - Operating costs for rural storm water management (collection, treatment and disposal) per kilometer of drainage system (RURAL) $ 2,744.23 $ 2,308.05 - Total costs for rural storm water management (collection, treatment and disposal) per kilometer of drainage system (RURAL) $ 2,805.46 $ 2,369.96 Parks & Recreation - Operation of Parks Efficiency - Operating cost for parks per person $ 41.49 $ 43.94 - Total cost for parks per person $ 50.59 $ 52.92 Recreation Programs - Operation of Recreation Programs Efficiency - Operating cost for recreation progams per person $ 47.76 $ 45.12 - Total cost for recreation progams per person $ 47.76 $ 45.12 Recreation Facilities - Operation of Recreation Facilities Efficiency - Operating cost for recreation facility per person $ 86.44 $ 80.81 - Total cost for recreation facility per person $ 99.62 $ 93.20 9 4 CITY OF PICKERING PERFORMANCE MEASUREMENT COMPARISON OF 2010 & 2009 MEASURES Performance Measurements 2010 2009 Parks, Recreation Programs & Recreation Facilities - Operations of Parks, Recreation Programs and Recreation Facilities Efficiency - Operating cost for recreation programs and recreation facilities per person per person (subtotal) $ 134.20 $ 125.93 - Total cost for recreation programs and recreation facilities per person (subtotal) $ 147.38 $ 138.32 Trails - To provide recreational opportunities - Total kilometers of trails and total kilometers of trails per 1,000 person 0.171 .0161 km Parks & Recreation - Open Space is adequate for population - Hectres of Open Space per 1,000 person 2.347 ha 7.639 ha Participant Hours for Recreation Programs - How Effective the City is in servicing the needs of residents for Recreation Programs - Total participant hours for recreation programs per 1,000 person 21,030 hrs 20,099 hrs Recreation Facility Space - Recreation facility space is adequate for population (municipally owned) - Square metres of indoor recreation facility space per 1,000 person 437.561 sq.m. 439.279 sq.m. - Square metres of outdoor recreation facility space per 1,000 person 284.938 sq.m. 286.057 sq.m. Library Services - Library Services Efficiency - Operating cost for library service per person $ 55.27 $ 54.89 - Total cost for library service per person $ 66.83 $ 67.45 - Operating cost for library service per use $ 1.76 $ 1.75 - Total cost for library service per use $ 2.13 $ 2.15 Library Services - Library Services Effectiveness - Library uses per person 31.340 31.425 - Percentage of Electronic Library uses 28.80% 30.00% - Percentage of Non - Electronic Library uses 71.20% 70.00% Planning and Development - Land Use Planning - Effectiveness - Percentage of new residential units located in settlement areas 100.00% 98.20% - Percentage of lands designated for agricultural purposes which was not re-designated for other uses during the reporting year 100.00% 99.69% - Percentage of land designated for argicultural purposes which was not re-designated for other uses relative to the base year of 2000. 99.50% 99.50% - Number of hectares of land originally designated for agricultural purposes which was re-designated for other uses during the reporting year 0 27 ha - Number of hectares of land originally designated for agricultural purposes which was re-designated for other uses since January 1, 2000. 42 ha 42 ha r ATTACHMENT # ; TO REPORT #L :32 95 City of Pickering Year 2010 Performance Measurement Report The Performance Measures required to be reported publicly under the Provincially mandated Performance Measurement Program will be available on the City of Pickering's website cityofpickering.com as of September 30, 2011 or available at the Corporate Services Department,. 2nd Floor, Pickering Civic Complex. Report To Executive Committee PICKERIlyG Report Number: CST 33-11 g 6 Date: September 12, 2011 From: Gillis A. Paterson Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer Subject: 2011 Final Tax Due Dates for Commercial, Industrial and Multi-Residential Realty Tax Classes Recommendation: 1. That Report CST 33-11 of the Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer be received; 2. That the Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer be authorized to issue the final 2011 Tax Bills for Commercial, Industrial and Multi-residential properties with a due date of October 14, 2011; 3. That the Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer be authorized to make any changes or undertake any actions necessary, including altering the due date, in order to ensure the tax billing process is completed and in order to comply with Provincial Regulations; 4. That the draft By-law attached to this report be enacted; and, 5. That the appropriate City of Pickering officials be authorized to take the necessary actions to give effect hereto. Executive Summary: Adoption of the above recommendations and passing the attached By-law provides for the final 2011 tax billing for non-residential tax classes (commercial, industrial and multi-residential). During the last few years, the City has billed the final non-residential taxes separately mainly due to the additional steps that are required as a result of the capping legislation. Financial Implications: The attached By-law is for the final billing of 2011 property taxes for commercial, industrial and multi-residential properties. This billing of final property taxes will raise approximately $20.8 million for the City, Durham Region and School Boards. Tax bills for the Residential tax classes were mailed on May 19, 2011 with due dates of June 29th and September 29tH Sustainability Implications: Passing the attached By-law will allow the City to obtain the Report CST 33-11 September 12, 2011 Subject: 2011 Final Tax Due Dates for Commercial, Industrial and Multi- Page 2 Residential Realty Tax Classes 97 funds required to maintain its financial sustainability objectives as provided for in the 2011 Current Budget. It also provides for the raising of property taxes for the Region of Durham and the school boards. Background: In 1998, the Province introduced Current Value Assessment or CVA on a Province wide basis to replace the old patch quilt system (throughout the Province) where each municipality used a different base year for assessment purposes. The end result of CVA was the fact that some businesses were experiencing property tax increases well above 100%. To reduce the property tax increases, the Province introduced capping legislation in 1998. The City of Pickering will soon be in a position to issue the final 2011 property tax bills in accordance with the capping provisions of Bill 140, Continued Protection for Property Taxpayers Act, passed by the Province on December 4, 2000 and implemented through various Regulations. (Bill 140 replaced the original capping legislation of Bill 79 introduced and approved in 1998). This legislation was put in place to limit assessment reform related increases to 5% per year on commercial, industrial and multi-residential properties. Under this legislation, property owners facing increases due to property assessment reform had their increases "capped" (reduced). Conversely, those properties experiencing decreases were limited to that permitted under the legislation. This meant that taxes have to be "clawed back" from those experiencing decreases to fund the loss of revenue resulting from the capped increases. The funding of the capping protection is "paid for" on a Region wide basis. The Region of Durham acts like a banker in this process. In other words, the total cost of the capping protection, for example the commercial tax class, is paid for by the other commercial properties throughout the Region by having a portion of their related property tax decrease withheld (clawed back). As part of the Region wide process, the City of Pickering uses a Provincial database program called "Online Property Tax Analysis" (OPTA) to verify non-residential assessment data. Every municipality within Durham Region uses the OPTA system. Assessment Review Board decisions and Minutes of Settlement decisions have been incorporated into the capping calculations up to the "freeze" date of May 27, 2011. Bill 83 - Legislative Changes to Capping Legislation In 2004, the Province passed Bill 83 (An Act to Implement Budget Measures), which provided for various optional tax tools that could be used for the non-residential tax class. In a two tier municipal government structure, the upper tier has the option to select all or some of the tax tools. These tax tools consisted of the following options: 1. The assessment related increase cap was increased from 5% to 10%0. Report CST 33-11 September 12, 2011 Subject: 2011 Final Tax Due Dates for Commercial, Industrial and Multi- Page 3 9s Residential Realty Tax Classes 2. Minimum annual threshold increase of 5% of total CVA property taxation. 3. A "billing" threshold be established whereby a property who is within the $250 of its CVA based taxation would be required to pay its full CVA property taxes. 4. The minimum CVA for new construction properties was 60% in 2006. These properties (new construction) are now fully phased-in. The purpose of these tax tools is to accelerate the movement of non-residential taxpayers to full CVA taxes (where taxes are calculated using Current Value Assessment multiplied by the corresponding tax rate). The Region of Durham adopted all of the tax tools referenced above. Under the Municipal Act, Subsection 343 (1), the tax bills have to be mailed 21 days before the due date. Taxation staff are cognizant of this legislative requirement and design the tax billing process to meet this requirement. However, there have been a few requests from the taxpayers for a longer period of time ( beyond the 21 day period). If the report is approved at the Executive Committee level, the outside printer will be given direction to start printing and mailing the tax bills and therefore, provide a longer notification period that in-turn is meeting some of the customers' requests. In 2011, the City of Pickering issued an interim tax bill to all property owners in all tax classes with two instalment dates of February 25th and April 28th. The proposed final instalment due date of October 14th for all properties in the Non-Residential tax classes, provides these tax classes with some additional time to pay their tax bill. Table One below illustrates the final billing due dates for the non-residential tax classes from 2005 to 2011. Table One Non-Residential Final Billing Dates Year Number of Date Instalments 2005 One October 14, 2005 2006 One October 13, 2006 2007 One October 12, 2007 2008 One October 15, 2008 2009 One October 19, 2009 2010 One October 15, 2010 2011 One October 14, 2011 Report CST 33-11 September 12, 2011 Subject: 2011 Final Tax Due Dates for Commercial, Industrial and Multi- Page 4 Residential Realty Tax Classes 99 As Table One indicates, the proposed 2011 final due date closely follows the pattern established since 2005. The one instalment.due date will assist the City in managing its cash flow. Attachments: 1. By-law to Establish the 2011 Final Tax Instalments and Due Date for the Commercial, Industrial and Multi-Residential Tax Classes. Prepared By: Approved/Endorsed By: Stan Karwowski Gillis A. Paterson Manager, Finance & Taxation Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer Copy: Chief Administrative Officer Recommended for the consideration of Pickering City Council . 2.3, ZD rl Tony Prevedel, P.Eng. Chief Administrative Officer 10 0 The Corporation of the City of Pickering By-law No. XXXX/11 Being a By-law to Establish the 2011 Final Property Taxes and Due Date for the Commercial, Industrial and Multi-Residential Tax Classes Whereas it is necessary for the Council of The Corporation of the City of Pickering, pursuant to the Municipal Act, 2001, S. 0. 2001, c.25 as amended, to pass a By-law to levy a separate tax rate on the assessment in each property class; and, Whereas the property classes have been prescribed by the Minister of Finance under the Assessment Act, R.S.O. 1990, ch.A.31, as amended and its Regulations; and, Whereas it is necessary for the Council of The Corporation of the City of Pickering, pursuant to the Municipal Act, 2001, S. 0. 2001, c.25, to levy on the whole rateable property according to the last revised assessment roll for The Corporation of the City of Pickering; and, Whereas the Regional Municipality of Durham has passed By-law No. 20-2011 to establish tax ratios and By-law No. 18-2011 to adopt estimates of all sums required by The Regional Municipality of Durham for the purposes of the Durham Region Transit Commission and By-law No. 19-2011 to set and levy rates of taxation for Regional Solid Waste Management and By-law No. 17-2011 to set and levy rates of taxation for Regional General Purposes and set tax rates on Area Municipalities; and, Whereas it is necessary for the Council of The Corporation of the City of Pickering pursuant to the Municipal Act, to levy on the whole rateable property according to the last revised assessment roll for The Corporation of the City of Pickering for the current year; and, Whereas an interim levy was made by the Council of The Corporation of the City of Pickering (pursuant to By-law No. 7103/11) before the adoption of the estimates for the current year; and, Whereas sub section 342 (2) of the Municipal Act, 2001, S. 0. 2001, c.25 as amended, permits the issuance of separate tax bills for separate classes of real property for year 2010. Now therefore the Council of the Corporation of the City of Pickering hereby enacts as follows: 1. For the year 2011, The Corporation of the.City of Pickering (the "City") shall levy upon all Property Classes (Residential, Commercial, Industrial and Multi- residential) as set out in By-law No. 7139/11 of Schedule A, the rates of taxation, for the City of Pickering, the Region of Durham and for Education purposes on the current value assessment. I By-law No. Page 2 j 107 2. Where applicable, taxes shall be adjusted in accordance with Bill 140, as amended and its Regulations. 3. The levy provided for shall be reduced by the amount of the interim levy for 2011. 4. The 2011 final tax calculations for the industrial, commercial and multi-residential realty tax classes is based on a freeze date of May 27, 2011. 5. The 2011 taxes owed for the commercial, industrial and multi-residential assessed properties shall be due in one instalment on October 14, 2011, or as adjusted by the Treasurer. 6. Except in the case of taxes payable under Section 33 and 34 of the Assessment Act, R.S.O. 1990, c.A31, as amended, the percentage charge as a penalty for non- payment of taxes and monies payable as taxes shall be added to every tax or assessment, rent or rate of any installment or part thereof remaining unpaid on the first day of default and on the first day of each calendar month thereafter in which such default continues pursuant to subsections 345 (1), (2) and (3) of the Municipal Act 2001, S.O. c.25 as amended. The Treasurer shall collect by distress or otherwise under the provisions of the applicable statutes all such taxes, assessments, rents, rates or installments or parts thereof as shall not have been paid on or before the several dates named as aforesaid, together with the said percentage charges as they are incurred pursuant to sections 349, 350 and 351 of the Municipal Act 2001, S.O. c.25 as amended. 7. If any section or portion of this By-law is found by a court of competent jurisdiction to be invalid, it is the intent of Council for The Corporation of the City of Pickering that all remaining sections and portions of this By-law continue in force and effect. 8. Taxes shall be payable to the Treasurer, City of Pickering. 9. This By-law comes into force on the date of its final passing. By-law read a first, second and third time and finally passed this 19th day of September 2011. David Ryan, Mayor Debbie Shields, City Clerk i Cry Report To Executive Committee PICKERING Report Number: CST 34-11 102 Date: September 12, 2011 From: Gillis A. Paterson Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer Subject: Cash Position Report as at June 30, 2011 Recommendation: That Report CST 34-11 of the Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer be received for information. Executive Summary: The attached schedules provide the City of Pickering's cash position, continuity of taxes receivable, outstanding investments, development charges collected, building permits issued and other development contribution information for the six months ended June 30, 2011. In summary, our mid-year 2011 operational results are relatively the same compared to the same period results last year. Local economic activity appears to be slightly and slowly improving from the recent world wide slowdown. However, not all indicators are positive as shown below for the first six months of 2011. • Cash available increased from $7.3M to $7.8M. • Property taxes receivable increased over the same period in 2010 from $53.3M to $57.3M partly reflecting increases in taxes billed for the City and.the Region (approximately 7.5%). • Development charges collected for the City, Region and School Boards increased over the same period.in 2010 from $2.4M to $4.2M (approximately 75%). • Building permits issued decreased over the same period in 2010 from 308 to 200 (approximately 35%). • Investment portfolio returns continue at historically low levels. Financial Implications: The cash position of the Corporation for the six months ended June 30, 2011 was a net increase in cash of $493,215 to $7,776,184. Sources of Funds totalled $139,783,895 and Uses of Funds totalled $139,290,680. The net cash balance together with the total current short term investments show that the City is in a sound financial position to meet the requirements for the remainder of 2011. Report CST 34-11 Date: September 12, 2011 Subject: Cash Position Report as at June 30, 2011 Page 21 03 Sustainability Implications: The maintenance of a healthy cash position contributes to sustainable financial management, as one of the City's Corporate Priorities. Background: This report presents a summary of activity for the six months ending June 30; 2011. The discussion below describes the purpose and the information contained in each of the attached schedules. Statement of Cash Position: Attachment 1 reflects the sources and uses of funds for,the first half of 2011. Subcategories have been identified to highlight those cash transactions that are significant in nature or large dollar value transactions for the City. This schedule summarizes the increase in cash of $493,215 over the first six months of 2011. Year to year periodical comparisons however may not be useful due to differences in timing of receipts and disbursements. Continuity of Taxes Receivable: Attachment 2 summarizes the tax related transactions from January 1 to June 30, 2011 and provides the outstanding taxes receivable as at June 30, 2011. This balance represents all three levels of taxes billed for the City, Region and School Boards. The June balance is not indicative of the true outstanding taxes for the City due to the timing of billing,and receipts. The outstanding balance includes the amounts owing for the September 29th residential due date of approximately $31.OM. The commercial final billing has not been billed hence not included in the total. Furthermore, with the City's pre-authorized payment plan, payment of taxes are spread over 10 months and artificially overstate outstanding taxes at June. Summary of taxes receivables are as follows: Current Year as at June 30, 2011: • Taxes billed to date: $146.OM (excludes final commercial biling) • Taxes receivable at Jun 30/11: $50.8M • Taxes paid: $102.OM All years as at June 30, 2011: • Total taxes outstanding: $57.3M • Current year outstanding: $51.1M • Prior years outstanding: $6.2M The year to date's taxes receivable is up by approximately $4.0 million or 7.5% as compared to the same period last year. This increase is mainly due to the fact that the City and the Region increase the amount billed each year due to budgetary levy increases. Report CST 34-11 Date: September 12, 2011 Subject: Cash Position Report as at June 30, 2011 Page 3 U Outstanding Investments: Attachment 3 reflects the short-term and long-term investments for both the Current and Reserve Funds as at June 30, 2011. Investments vary year over year depending on the timing of the collection and remittance of development charges and supplementary taxes. Total investment portfolio as at June 30, 2011 is $67.9 million with $1.1 million coming from internal loans and $66.8 million from general investments. Development Charges Collected: The City is responsible for collecting development charges on behalf of all levels of government. Attachment 4 indicates the total development charges collected for the City, Region and School Boards. The total amount collected of $4,202,361 agrees with the balance indicated under Sources of Funds on Attachment 1. However, the remittance of development charges to the Region and School Boards indicated under the Use of Funds is different than the total collected on Attachment 4. This variance is a result of timing differences because payments to the Region and School Boards are due 25 days following the month collected. The total development charges collected in the first six months of 2011 increased 75.0% from the same period in 2010 from $2.4M to $4.2M. Other Development Contributions: Attachment 5 is provided to show other significant development contributions that have been received. Multi year Receipts: The balance of the tables shows multi year receipts. The first half of 2011 total collection for the City's portion of development charges is up by almost 66.2% over the same period last year. Building permits issued is down by about 35.1% to 200 permits issued during the first half of this year compared to 308 issued in same period last year. Attachments: 1. Statement of Cash Position 2. Continuity of Taxes Receivable 3. Outstanding Investments 4. Statement of Development Charges Collected 5. Other Development Contributions 6. City Portion of Development Charges Collected 2003 - 2011 (Semi-annual) 7. Building Permits Issued 2000 - 2011 Report CST 34-11 Date: September 12, 2011 Subject: Cash Position Report as at June 30, 2011 Page 4 Prepared By: Approved / Endorsed By: Dennis P. Arboleda Gillis A. Paterson, CMA Supervisor, Accounting Services Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer Copy: Chief Administrative Officer Recommended for the consideration of Pickering Citv- Council Y46e~ I , - Tony Prevedel, P.Eng. Chief Administrative Officer ATTACHMENT # I TO REPORT # Cs73- 106 City of Pickering Cash Position Statement for six months ending June 30, 2011 Sources of Funds: Accounts Receivable collected $ 871,755 Development charges collected* 4,202,361 Operating 19,597,344 Grants-in-lieu: Federal 948,027 Provincial 373,285 Ontario enterprises 3,975,044 Municipal enterprises 1,313,152 Federal specific grants 41,182 Ontario specific grants 63,968 Interest Income 192,250 Sale of land 500 Tax payments received" 108,129,662 POA Revenue 75,365 Total $ 139,783,895 Use of Funds: Operating and Capital Expenditures $ 33,374,550 Payroll 18,233,731 Region Levy 62,452,961 Regional portion of Dev. Charges 2,783,390 School Board Levies 20,911,551 School Board portion of Dev. Charges 508,676 Debenture payment to Region 1,025,821 Total $ 139,290,680 Net Cash Increase (Decrease) $ 493,215 Financial Position Bank Balance Net Cash Bank Balance January 1, 2011 Provided Used June 30, 2011 Current Fund $ 7,282,969 $ 493,215 $ 7,776,184 TOTAL $ 7,282,969 $ 493,215 $ 7,776,184 Note: Includes City, Region and School Boards ATTACHMENT # TO REPORT #.C5-73C(- 107 ' r fV O M I, O CD In CD •L ~J d ~ Lo co 00 O I, N r I,- r "t N O M 00 c vi ll:f O 00 U I~ O cc O O O I` O O M to O O to a d M N VN N N 00 co co Lo N 4- C4 I- 4) Lc) U) in co v ui c%~ I~ ti v O V C (D r C) O to r N M I- 00 to W r• R C OJ 00 to M Co M 't I` 00 CO O p r £ 00 rl to N 4: V r O O V r O (D r Lo r u, rn Lo 00 r 1~ ` O N fA O r O co O N y r 04 r N N v r co 7 Co Q c = o a C o E x r M r O CO r O +c V r lf> N rf 00 r N U) "o =3 'N N C~ CO r N 7 p x p L !a d ~ 00 t- n c N m 40 ~ N • ` "O ` Q ^ > r Ch r O 693 Co r Q 1 N O Q C~C N d m Oj U ` N C CD E E m 6R x a) a) O m ° Q _ E C. CxC Q CO a) C n I- w C a r O O cn O C C N O 3 N Cn 0) Mn . O N .U co 04. c%j 'C 00 co N a) a) ~o 06 C v o x ~ 6R CEO to C (n =3 N v P m O C1 CT X CO ,(6 O U') X19 E ` m r m r E D a) a) a N N N Lj cn o > O O (O N co U O a) 'a rn L o ° O rn C O N 0) rn c f-: 00 r c6 In CO 'IT a) r cc~i_ p m 'C En mac'') v N IL a c (D CLI c c cn a LL fA c ti LL Q O N co co CO v 0) It r- r pp N d O O r cr N m r O co I- le C e= .G O I~ O N N M ll;: O O 00 N O~ CC N co O O CO r co O I r E N M ~ O r CO co r 00 q N O O N ER to M r to O It O N M M O U ) V CO N O Q ~ y U C C_ 7 2 (D cn cn U) CU N O O CU C V O a) co C C C C _C - M O a a m 06 P- m N N o ` a C O CB x N Ch C 0 M N CB a) M N O N J co c a) X C X C X C X C CD C Q Cn ~ ,0 i N O O m w O N O CO O ` m a) a) a o t- d °o H CD H a° a p o r x t m a) U N N N d tr Z N fn 1 08 ATTACHMENT # 3 TO REPORT #.!25-D r 0 0 0 0 0 0 -O 0 0 O 0 0 0 a 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O c r gOgqOOOqo R gg9qqqOq0q9q4qqq q ° • C O 0 a 0 0 0 0 a O C7 O v (O O C7 0 CD CD 0 C, 0 0 CD 0 C[) C) C7 h W) d N O O O O O O o 0 0 O O v O CD 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 m 0 0 v It Y c 0 c 0 0 c C 0 c O O N O O O O O O O O O O O O O O M M V tb 10 co 10 COD O M V O N a r N CA N O O M O M o V N M 0 CND O r r a. d M 7 r cccc O M Ih O O r r O) f, cc u') D) O c r= (M V Vr,~ n r N M M M W > C c N M N r N V C) C7 M N r r N N N r N r N N N N N N M o ; C U :a C y e» o ts> v~ U N O O Z y 2 a N 0 ~y O ~rnM^v O W WO W W W N Q Z) co ~0 aOOOrnOrnOr~OO ~06 m (n O m <-otS ao a s 4b _3 z w (n 00 o W u) CL 06 co W zcC O06 Q t- vrn U') UciLoOrn r- a°o a! -jZ2 v~~}~Z W `m uiriaoooriuiN Di o OOQQ¢¢ ¢n(natn202g~p T d C<7 N V O O CO - m N CC) 'I M 2 cl V M J = _ (n In (n W ¢ w ¢ Z m ~ L~lNhMCD--- ~ o Z¢ZZa- CL Q. ~F az(na "ITa a- 0 ~Q¢»mQm0¢0U0w5 c a a Q-= a a Q a Q z ch z Q a W a Z) U) E CL cL OW W WFW-H0 0W W000F owwwwwmwmQ?Qm0zw F- 6q O O CD CD Cn CD V O r O n N n O O N O Cn CO CO O V f~ V O h W O M O Cl O V O N N O r co ~ V O O V O r 0 00 (D co co CD O (G (O O v O D) D) CO v n O m M m W V O O W O V m m Cn O M r` O w N CV O (1') v CD 00 r- Cl) O) Cf) M O CA (D CD O O M O 0o r- CD N N CC) O N CO - ~ a) f` V I OO (D Cl) co 00 N W M O r M O O M 0 O) N 00 V O M O CC) r V E rnr- to vvmco CD v N Lo 0)co c000CD O ~ v Cn Cn M OO co a M M O V W M O N 00 r M N O O f- O O N O O M M 0 fz M O W N N C O 00 00 M W O O O r co CO. v O M O O N O v (D 0 0 0 W M M C!) 00 r r > Q N M N r N M Cn L6 O M N r r N N N r N r N N M Cl) N N M to Cfl b9 b9 EH 0 0 0 0 o o 0 \ o 0\° w 0 0 0 \o o 0 0 0 \o \o o o 0 0 0 0 o 0 0 O O 00 CD n M M r 0 0 O N (D M O M V CD O O O O O O O C 2 0 0 n ,w r (n 0 0 0 0 0 CO M t, O O N r N r CO N q V r N 2 r V 16 r O r r r r r r U') N M N N CO N V V v O V N M N C r r Cn M r M V r M t2 N V M C2 00 V CD V r Cn U 7 L1 7 7 CA a U n n U C 6- U d d> C~6 C Q N 3 ? 0) M M 7 a) 0 a) a) 0) 7 a) O a) a) 0 0 7 a) 0 N CO 0 a) n 1- Q O N O N ¢(n V (n (n Q (n Q (n (n z LL (n C) Oa a) O N Cn (D O N N M O N O O O co r r N r N O COD r r r N r r r r 0 r MO O O O O O O O O O O O O O O m r r r O F C L > U C C n a .6 T r L a) (0 0 a a (0 C0 7 7 7 0 0 7 7 a) a) N O N U U U V a) . r (o ~~Q¢~~~~~ zQ-)~(n(nLL~g0000Q~¢ Q O O O N N N O N N aO OO M O O N N N N O O O O cn N O IL r r of Z Z Z Z Z z 0 z D z F-F- F-F-F- O Z w ~JJ JJ a U) J c Z Z Z Z z z IOU` (9 W W u~0 W mW 'W-00F- W R o » Q Oco zZaa aaF-WO5; OOa d 00 000 O UJ F F QZ ¢ ~ UZ o C 3 ~¢0U UUU U U) F ¢ O .~F- ZZ zF-ZF- ~F-F-F- Z ii c. Ez~~ ODD w E00MM22 2OpOOOO02 Z U) u CO Qz Qz ¢ Qz o zQ ¢ Qz CD O w o m 0 0 z o 0 a O w 0 0 0 0 2 (a0 F- > F- m co m co co co co co y y > > w¢¢ Y Y¢ Y> W> Q> > > y F- U z CCn(n<n(n(nCn(nfn(n w c00ZZzzca zOQ000oOz y o w ;9~22222222 Z W L a m¢¢¢¢ Q¢W O a m a a a¢ w - LL mmmmmmmm ca W 00MMF-MCL CL W aaam Z U) LL 2 LU LL d w w d a w E ? N N N N N N N N y ~ N y N N N y y N N N N N N h O N w H aoi ' va'i E E E E E E E E E z ow E E E E E E E E E E E E c c c E F' F- > 4 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 w N 7 7 7 7 D 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 O y > E 0) m m m m m m m m m O w w m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m z w z [n w 06 ~ z Z ~ t ~ « _ ~ ~ w = = z z = = = = = w = = z O A F- y w 0 W Z E F- C y 0) 0) N N N(n M N J C rn N N N N N N N N N N N N rn N N J J a) W d a) a) a) m m a) a) N N Q 0 an (D a) a) a) 0) a) a) a) a) a) a) a) a) N a) m Q ¢ c 0 ` Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z ` z Z Z Z z z z z Z Z Z z z Z Z Z N U 0 0 V 0 0 ATTACH MENT#-~[- TO REPORT# ~S2(3 109 G1 y N co co V- Y O (o O (D M a' M 69 O O L O M N 0 (D L6 & 40 a. - N C ~ r5 (o to U a = d •o ~ Q m N co NN ONO O O O O ~j O= O 61). O O CC) E r r M O N d to r E: = V Q 0 N N O N O Lo (o m co r m N V (o ~ N O ER O O f- 00 N 00 N N M _ 0 co 7 V E m E Lo D M ~ 0) 0) cl C fA O O N (V c ti c f- to M q O r- N O) C O 00 r- N co N co n O a? co Oo OD ti 0. CD o rn cl o cli N O O Cn N N v O W H U W J J O V co Q i L) - c Q c LL Q a ATTACHMENT# 5 TO REPORT# r3 110 L C E. L c0 L? cn C N E L U f0 01 U) N co 00 c Q C r n .L 0 ~ p c0 Y 7 N N CO) CY) M O p ~ E ~ Q. ~ O ~ D 0 E t x O L 0 c Y (0 a 0 a~ C W ~ L Z ~ U N . m U Z la- V O ATTACH MENT# TO REPORT # L5-T-# -tt 111 00 11 N ~o T N N N Q s N ~ N O N w N M N rn ~ ~ O N ~ O r t N w OD to O O rn N N 0 00. o N CD t N 'C v d m N,=O nj N O to ti w-U N ~o O N O e-tN Q O M -O- t0 N m O tEO t I N N t N avM N o 0 U d N rn N CL ct O rn C t4 O O N N N Q v a 4.to to N ; O p- S O It N N OD .a q* act 10 m N Z N N N N O ~O P. N to r O M M N m N co) ~O N O O O O O OO O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O V) O O O U) M N N r r ATTACHMENT#7TO REPORT # CS (N lI 112 0) Cc N O N = O O h-: r N N = o O :L- M O Ca E N = 44 0*) (D -4 a O C (0 .o N N 2 O m O «r 4- Z O 2 o N N co N N 2 0 4-- C) r (6 N = • M N r M O O N N Z N I` 4- CD Ca ao = N O N 0 N 0) N 00 N u .4 L co O N O O w N co O O ~r N so N O O N v ~ O O N O O O O O O O O O O O O O N O O O O O O O O O CA 00 I'- CO Lo d' CO N Cit'l Report To Executive Committee PT 1CKERI G Report Number: CST 35-11 Date: September 12, 2011 113 From: Gillis A. Paterson Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer Subject: Council Compensation Policy Recommendation: 1. That Report CST 35-11 of the Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer be received; 2. That the revised wording for.Section 06.03 of the Council Compensation Policy, included as Attachment #1, be approved; and, 3. That the appropriate officials of the City of Pickering be authorized to take.the necessary actions to give effect hereto. Executive Summary: Section 06.03 of the Council Compensation Policy provides that the City shall contribute to a Member of Council's Registered Retirement Savings Plan (RRSP). Currently, the section requires that the City make the contribution directly to the respective member's. financial institution in January of the following year. The proposed change is to provide the Members of Council with a second option for receiving a contribution to their RRSP from the City. The Member of Council could make a contribution to their RRSP during the course of the year and the City then, reimburse that member, to a maximum of 13%. of their earned salary, in January of the following year. Financial Implications: There are no financial. implications associated with this report. Sustainability Implications: There are no sustainability implications associated with this report. Background: Section 06.03 of the Council Compensation Policy provides that the City shall contribute to a Member of Council's Registered Retirement Savings Plan (RRSP) to a maximum of 13% of the member's earned salary. This contribution is i Report CST 35-11 September 12, 2011 Subject: Council Compensation Policy Page 2 made directly to the member's financial institution before January 31St of the following year and is only provided if the member confirms they have sufficient contribution room. With the contribution being made in January, the member of Council has the benefit of recognizing the deduction in either the previous or current tax year. However, at the same time, it may limit when the contribution is being made. There may be times that it may be advantageous to make contributions to an RRSP at other times throughout the year to benefit from conditions in the financial markets. In effect, the member would be limited to only having a contribution made in January or having to reduce their contribution to account for the City's contribution being made in January on their behalf. The City can only make the contribution in the following year to ensure the member of council has earned their full salary for the year as this is what the contribution is based upon. Therefore, it is proposed that the member of council have the option of making a contribution to their RRSP during the course of the year and the City would then reimburse the member directly, to a maximum of 13% of the member's earned salary, in January of the following year after the member provided evidence of the contribution being made to their own or spousal RRSP. This would provide the member the flexibility of the timing of the contribution. Two options would now be available to members of Council. Attachments: 1. Revised Section 06.03 of Council Compensation Policy Prep red By: Approved/Endorsed By: Kristine Senior, CA Gillis A. Paterson, CMA Manager, Accounting Services Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer Copy: Chief Administrative Officer Recommended for the consideration of Pickering City Council Tony Prevedel, P.Eng. Chief Administrative Officer ATTACHMENT # I TO REPORT# L73 - li' Section 06.03 of Council Compensation Policy (revised) 115 06.03 A Member of Council may maintain a Registered Retirement Savings Plan (RRSP), either own or spousal, under Federal legislation to which the Corporation shall contribute a maximum of 13% of the Member's earned salary each year. a) To have the City make the contribution or reimburse for the contribution, the Member of Council must provide: i. Written confirmation that a member has sufficient contribution room, as provided by the Canada Revenue Agency on their notice of assessment, to accommodate the City's contribution shall be provided to the Treasurer no later than December 31St in any given year and the City's contribution shall be made directly to that RRSP no later than January 31 st of the next calendar year. OR ii. Evidence of a contribution by a Member towards an RRSP shall be provided to the Treasurer no later than December 31St in any given year. The member will then be reimbursed for the contribution, to a maximum of 13% of the Member's earned salary, no later than January 31St of the next calendar year. b) The word "salary" shall mean the annual base salary, pro- rated for a Member not holding office for an entire calendar year, of the Mayor and Councillors and it excludes all, taxable benefits and allowances. The contribution to an RRSP is a taxable benefit regardless of whether it is paid to the Member of Council or the financial institution. c) The City shall make its contribution only in the month of January of the next calendar year regardless of when the Member of Council made a contribution, except when a Member of Council ceases to hold office during the year, in which case a whole or partial contribution will be made in that year. Cal, o0 Report To Executive Committee PI `KERING Report Number: CST 36-11 1 1 6 Date: September 12, 2011 From: Gillis A. Paterson Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer Subject: Tender / Contract Approval - Councils' Summer Recess Recommendation: 1. That Report CST 36-11 of the Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer regarding tender and contract approvals during Councils' Summer Recess be received; and, 2. That Council pass a resolution ratifying the approval of the Tenders and Contracts by the Chief Administrative Officer during Councils' summer recess being: Request for Proposal No. RFP-2-2011 - Design, Supply and Installation of two Ultra Violet Treatment Systems at two City Pools; and, Request for Proposal No. RFP-3-2011 - Redesign of Website. Executive Summary: Council is required to approve contracts awarded by the Chief Administrative Officer during recesses of Council. The tender and contract approvals contained in this report were approved by the Chief Administrative Officer during the summer recess of Council, which met City Policy and were within the approved Budget. Financial Implications: The capital projects listed and described in this report are being funded from various sources as approved by Council in Capital Budgets. The total projected costs are below budget in the net amount of $4,868.24 and the surplus funds will be returned to the various funding sources for use in future budgets. The projects were awarded to the only proponent of one RFP and the highest scoring proponent for the other RFP and were within budget as required by Resolution #80/02 and therefore within staff's authority to approve during Council's recess. There are no additional financial implications associated with these projects or this report. Sustainability Implications: The addition of the UV systems will reduce the use of harsh chemicals in water, resulting in the reduction of maintenance costs as well as improving the safety and quality of water. Report CST 36-11 Date: September 12, 2011 Subject: Tender / Contract Approval Page 2 - Councils' Summer. Recess 117 Background: On May 21, 2002 Council passed Resolution #80/02 Item 4 authorizing the Chief Administrative Officer act in Council's approving capacity on behalf of Council during any recess, break or absence of City Council, which states in part: "2. That, subject to the Council approved Purchasing Policy & Procedures, the Chief Administrative Officer be authorized to act in Council's approval capacity on behalf of Council during any recess, break or absence of City Council on the condition that. (a) such actions are in compliance with the Purchasing Policy & Procedure as approved under Resolution 136102; and (b) the costs thereof are within the budget previously approved by Council; and (c) a report respecting those approvals is subsequently submitted to Council." Circumstances were such that two proposals required approval by the Chief Administrative Officer during Council's summer 2011 recess. It is recommended that Council receive this Report for information and ratify the approval of Request for Proposal No. RFP-2-2011, Design, Supply and Installation of two Ultra Violet Treatment Systems at two City Pools and Request for Proposal No. RFP-3-2011, Redesign of Website (cityofpickering.com). Therefore, under authority of the foregoing, the following was approved by the Chief Administrative Officer during the "summer recess" of Council: Request for Proposal No. RFP-2-2011, Design, Supply and Installation of two Ultra Violet Treatment Systems at two City Pools The only proposal, No. RFP-2-2011 submitted by Water & Ice North America Inc., in the amount of $75,753.00 plus HST be approved. Financial Implications: 1. RFP Amount RFP-2-2011 $75,753.00 HST (13%) 9,847.89 Subtotal 85,600.89 HST (11.24%) (8,514.64) Total $77,086.25 Report CST 36-11 Date: September 12, 2011 Subject: Tender / Contract Approval Page 4 - Councils' Summer Recess 2. Approved Source of Funds 2011 Current Budget Summary Corporate Priorities Source of Funds Budget Required Current Budget $130,000 $128,045.76 Total Funds $128,045.76 3. Estimated Project Costing Summa RFP-3-2011 $ 96,350.00 HST (13%) 12,525.50 Sub Total $108,875.50 HST Rebate (11.24%) (10,829.74) Total Net Cost $ 98,045.76 *Miscellaneous Costs (writing and photography) 30,000.00 Total Project Costs $128,045.76 Project Cost under (over) approved funds by [$130,000 -$128,045.76] $1,954.24 Attachments: 1. Community Services Memorandum, July 19, 2011 2. Office of Sustainability Memorandum, August 12, 2011 3. Resolution #80/02, Item #4 4. Resolution #85/00, Item #1 Prepared By: Approved / Endorsed By: Vera A. Felgemacher Gillis A. Paterson, C.M.A. C.P.P., CPPO, CPPB, C.P.M., CMM III Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer Manager, Supply & Services GAP:vaf Report CST 36-11 Date: September 12, 2011 Subject: Tender / Contract Approval Page 5 120 - Councils' Summer Recess Copy: Chief Administrative Officer Recommended for the consideration of Pickering City Council . 2-4 2-011 Tony Prevedel, P.Eng. Chief Administrative Officer ATTACHMENT # TO REPORT # C->' 36 ~1 I 1 21 Office of the CAO PICKERING Received 1 Memo fait BICENTENNIAL 2011 File rolluvw up To: Tony Prevedel Mayor Corn Serv July 19,-2011 Chief Administrative Officer council c&R Directors Eng Services From: Everett Buntsma sMT oiler & Fac Director, Community Services Clerk Corp Services Fire office Sustain Copy: Director, Corporate Services & T e SQ:1111i pan Res Plan & Dev Division Head,- Culture & Recrea o Legal & Ls Manager, Supply & Services (Acting) Manager, Culture & Recreation Supervisor, Facilities Operations Subject: Request for Proposal No. RFP-2-2011 Design, Supply and Installation of two Ultra Violet Treatment Systems at Two (2) City Pools - File: A-1440-001-11 Requests for Proposals were invited from six companies. A.rnandatory site visit.was held on Monday, June 6, 2011 and three (3) bidders attended of which one (1) responded by the official closing date and time. The lowest acceptable proposal was submitted by Water & Ice North America Inc. Recommendation: 1. That proposal No. RFP-2-2011 submitted by Water & Ice North America Inc. at a cost of $85,600.89 (HST included) be accepted; 2. That the total gross project cost of $85,600.89 (HST included) and 'a net project cost of $77,086 (net of HST rebate) be approved; 3. That the Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer be authorized to fund the project in the . sum of $77,086 from the Recreation Complex Pool Surcharge Reserve as provided for in the approved 2011 Capital Budget - Recreation Complex Pool; 4. That the appropriate City of Pickering officials be authorized to take necessary action to give effect thereto. Executive Summary: 122 The addition of UV disinfection systems for the main and tot pools at the Pickering Recreation Complex were approved by Council in the 2011 Capital Budget at an estimated cost of $80,000. The installation of these two systems will improve disinfection, lower chlorine usage and reduce chloramines in City pools. Requests for Proposals were invited from six companies and the only proposal received was submitted by Water & Ice North America Inc. This company's references have been checked and are deemed acceptable by the Director, Community Services. The total net project cost to supply and install the UV disinfection system is $77,086 (net of HST rebate). The Community Services Department recommends that the bid of Water & Ice North America Inc. be accepted. Financial Implications: 1. RFP Amount RFP-2-2011 $75,753.00 HST (13%) 9,847.89 Subtotal' 851600.89 HST (11.24%) 8 514.64 Total $77,086.25 2. Approved Source of Funds Community Services Department Capital Rec. Complex -Pool Capital Budget Location Project Code Source of Budget Required Funds Disinfection System 5733.1101 Recreation $80,000 $77,086 - Recreation Complex Pool Complex Pool Surcharge Total Funds $77,086 July 19, 2011 Page 2 RFP-2-2011 Design, Supply and Installation of two Ultra Violet. Treatment Systems at Two (2) City Pools 3. Estimated Project Costing Summa 123 RFP-2-2011 $75,753 Miscellaneous Costs 0 Total Project Costs $75,753 HST (13%) 9.847 Total Gross Project Cost 85,600 HST Rebate (11.24%) (8,514) Total Net Project Cost $77,086 Project Cost under (over) approved funds by $2,914 The 2011 Budget for the design, supply and installation of two UV disinfection systems was approved to be funded from the Recreation Complex .Pool Surcharge Reserve. Sustainability Implications: The addition of the UV systems will reduce the use of harsh chemicals in water, resulting in the reduction of maintenance costs as well as improving the safety and quality of water. Background: The addition of proven UV technology used in the treatment of drinking water in pools has enabled municipalities to provide increased protection to the participants and users of the swimming pools in the City. The City pools are used seven days per week, seventeen hours per day and the high bather loads associated with public pools can. easily overwhelm traditional methods of disinfection such as chlorine treatment. Ultraviolet disinfection is proven to improve safety and protect our patrons against microorganisms, including chlorine. resistant organisms such as Cryptosporidium. The use of UV to treat swimming pool water is similar to using UV light to disinfect drinking water. The UV lamps used for germicidal disinfection produces a portion of its light in the 254-nm wavelength in medium pressure technology. At the 254-nm wavelength, UV light destroys bacteria, protozoa, viruses, molds, algae and other microbes. This includes fecal coliform and July 19, 2011 Page 3 RFP-2-2011 Design, Supply and Installation of two Ultra Violet Treatment Systems at Two (2) City Pools such waterborne diseases such as E-coli, hepatitis, cholera, dysentery, typhoid fever as well as many others. 124 The use of UV for swimming puol disinfection does not mean the complete elimination of chlorine. A residual is still required, but using UV for disinfection will lower chemical costs and usage, provide instantaneous disinfection (chemicals require a residence time), lower disinfection by- products (chloramines) that have been associated with cancers and.provide less intensive maintenance. Benefits of UV disinfection systems • Virtually eliminates chloramines in the pool (musty chlorine smell) • Significant increase in water quality • Reduces the cause of red eye and skin irritation • No more unpleasant odours • Provides protection against micro-organisms including Cryptosporidium • Reduces degradation of building components • Reduces use of chlorine and associated chemicals Requests for Proposals were invited from six companies. A mandatory site visit was held on Monday, June 6, 2011 and three (3) bidders attended of which one (1) responded by the official closing date and time. The only proposal received was submitted by Water & Ice North America Inc. This company's references have been checked and are deemed acceptable by the Director, Community Services. The Health and Safety Policy, Clearance Certificate issued by Workplace Safety and Insurance Board (WSIB), the WSIB Cost and Frequency Record and Certificate of Insurance as submitted. by Water & Ice North America Inc have been reviewed by the Coordinator, Health & Safety and are deemed acceptable. An evaluation committee comprised of Supply Services staff and Facilities staff was established to review the proposal against the evaluation criteria set out in the terms of reference. Water & Ice's proposal was determined to meet all requirements of the proposal call. Upon careful review and relevant documents received, the Community Services Department recommends the acceptance of the proposal No..RFP-2-2011 submitted by Water & Ice North America Inc. in the amount of $85,600.89 (HST.included) and that the total net project cost of $77,086 be approved. In accordance with Purchasing Policy Item 04.09 (RFP) where the total purchase price is greater than $54,000 Council shall approve the award. In accordance with Resolution #80/02 Item #4, the CAO has the authority to act in Council's approval capacity during any recess, break or absence of City Council. July 19, 2011 Page 4 RFP-2-2011 Design, Supply and Installation of two Ultra Violet Treatment Systems at Two (2) City Pools This report has been prepared in conjunction with the Manager, Supply & Services who concur with the foregoing. 125 Attachments: 1. Supply & Services Memorandum dated June 17, 2011 2. Proposal Review Committee. Assessment ed-L do sed By: Prepared By: Approv ike winnell Everett B ma S rvisor, Facilities Operations Director, Operations & Emergency Services Maris C rpino Gillis Paterson, CMA (Acting anager, Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer Culture & Recreation Caryn Kong, CGA "Step n fle olds Senior Financial Analyst-Capital & Divisi n Head, Culture & Recreation Debt Management Vera A. F Igemacher CSMSP, CPPO, CPPB, CPM, CMM III Manager,"Supply & Services EB: mld Copy: Chief Administrative Officer Approval 22, 2_0d Tony-Prevedel, P.Eng. Chief Administrative Officer July 19, 2011 Page 5 RFP-2-2011 Design, Supply and Installation of two Ultra Violet Treatment Systems at Two (2) City Pools PICKERING~._ ~i I-NJ Memo 181 1 BICENTENNIAL 2011 Mike Dwinnell June 17, 2011 To: Supervisor, Facilities Operations From: Vera A. Felgemacher Manager, Supply & Services Copy: Co-ordinator, Health & Safety Subject: Request for Proposal No. RFP-2-2011 Design, Supply and Installation of Ultra Violet Treatment Systems at Two (2) City Pools Closing: Thursday, June 16, 2011, 2:00pm (local time) - 'File: F-5300-001 Request for proposals were invited from six (6) companies. A mandatory site visit was held on Monday, June 6, 2011 and three (3) bidders attended of which one (1)•responded by the official closing date and time. A preliminary review to ensure the "Essential Submission Requirements" appear in the submission has been undertaken. This compliance checklist is to be used in evaluating the "overall completeness and quality of submission". Each item is to be reviewed more closely by committee members and scored to reflect each item's relevance and value. Please refer to Terms of Reference - Evaluation of Submissions, Page 8 for instructions on how the proposal is to be evaluated by committee members. The Health & Safety documentation received with the submission has been provided to the Co- ordinator, Health & Safety to review and will be provided a score out. of 3 points for the submission. This will be combined with the remaining scores during the committee review.to assist in determining the total average score for the submission. -Attachments are as follows: 1. Preliminary Compliance Checklist 2. Evaluation form (to be used by Evaluation Committee Members) 3. Copy of Terms of Reference 4. Copy of the proposal received Please co-ordinate an appropriate date and time to arrange a meeting for the evaluation committee. Each member should review the submission carefully according to the criteria before the meeting time. Please do not disclose any information to enquiring bidders during this time - they will be advised of the outcome in due course. Please direct enquires to Supply & Services. If yoVre uire further information, please feel free to contact me or a member of Supply & Services. VAFAttachments in. m j c 127 90 o ~ c~ Z D -I 3 m e 3 3 G 0 CD 0 7• z . - 3 D 3 S m 'c 3 ` CD c0 Z77 - m ; ((D Y d 0 N ? O 3 C tD O n (n. CD 3 _ - (D W - 7 i N - O N .N 3 O O M O j 7 3 v N 7 X n 7-8 m m to < o x m m• 3 n 'tn N ivy m m m O a m-0 m N C ..A O• N c N 7 d tD W cn N 3 lD 7 m N_• 7C A 7. 0) J OW /D N O O 7 AG O N n. O. 7 Co O 3•to 3 4 n 11 O S a - COD to (D O v 03 42 ID aY . c . O tG tD - c n N X 3 .p ? m S M. CD = CD CO 0 O. p O N . d. Ol ~ O CL d m 3 2-0 y » d am v r30 3 -0 . d N= 7- 7 N M W v C^ O O O O C . to r. d ~2 CD < c O . CD fD to = N . N y C. .Q~ go n W D CD CL o.. 0O+ CD (A a o `L ,,ate o -0 0 o O . it O 3 3 CD ATTACHMENT #-2:-TO REPORT # CST 36.1 I Memo PicKERNG- sail BICENTENNIAL 2011 To: Tony Prevedel August 12, 2011 Chief Administrative Officer From: Tom Melymuk Director, Office of Sustainability Copy: Directors Division Heads Manager, Supply & Services eServices Team Subject: Request for Proposal No. RFP-3-11 Redesign of Website (cityofpickering.com) - File: A-3200 Requests for Proposals were received from 11 companies, and were evaluated on August 9, 2011. The Evaluation Team was comprised of a cross section of staff: Tom Melymuk, Director, Office of Sustainability Jon Storms, Manager, Information Technology Nancy Johnstone, Website Coordinator Fiaz Jadoon, Economic Development Officer Vera.Felgemacher, Manager, Supply & Services Jill Hone, Buyer The combined average of two proposals. passed the minimum scoring threshold. The highest ranking proponent is eSolutions. The lump sum price is $96,350 (excluding HST), and is within the 2011 Budget Allocation. Recommendation: 1. That proposal No. RFP-3-2011 submitted by eSolutions at a cost $108,875.50 (HST included) be accepted; 2. That the total project cost (including writing and photography) of $128,045.76 (HST included) and a net cost of $98,045.76 (net of HST rebate) be approved; 3. That the Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer be authorized to fund the project in the sum of $128,045.76 as allocated in the 2011 Current Budget; and 4. That the appropriate City of Pickering officials be authorized to take necessary action to give effect thereto. 3. Estimated Project Costing Summa RFP-3-2011 $ 96,350.00 129 HST (1 s~Io) 12.525.50 Sub Total $108,875.50 HST Rebate (11.24%) 10 829.74 Total Net Cost $ 98,045.76 *Miscellaneous Costs (writing and photography) 30,000.00 Total Project Costs $128,045.76 *In order to move forward with the review and preparation of content to meet our timelines, it was determined to remove the writing and photography component from RFP requirements and proceed with retaining a temporary staff person to review and develop content with key staff. This was approved by the Chief Administrative Officer and the Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer. As a result, the budget allocation in the 2192-1100 (salary account) will be over expended, which will be offset by the under expenditure m the website development account 2192- 6100. In total the project is under budget as shown below: Project Cost under (over) approved funds by [$130,000 -$128,045.76] $1,954.24 The.2011 Budget for the website re-design was approved to be funded from the 219276100 -account. Corporate Priorities: Our corporate priorities are Community Engagement, Corporate Best Practices; Human Resource Development, Financial Management and Sustainable Placemaking. Redevelopment of the corporate website directly aligns with two of our corporate priorities, Community Engagement and Corporate Best Practices. Background: As part of our Corporate Priorities initiatives, an eServices Team was established comprised of a cross-representation of staff. A key objective of the team was to review best practices, and current technologies to re-develop the City's website. As part of that review, a focus group was held in November 2010 to review municipal best practices and current technologies, and to initiate internal discussion on our needs and priorities. The following Website Objectives were confirmed: A user-centric, self-serve approach to our service delivery through the use of our website to align with our corporate priorities, including a key focus on community engagement; promoting inclusion, transparency and efficiency through the best practices available. We will achieve this by focusing on the following objectives: L Functional objective: to utilize current technologies (and future technologies as they become available) as appropriate to facilitate meeting overall website objectives, i.e. social media, Google analytics, RSS feeds. August 12, 2011 Page 3 RFP-3-2011 Website Redesign (cityofpickering.com) Attachments: 13 1. Supply & Services memo dated August 11, 2011 - 2. Proposal Review Committee Assessment Prepared By: Approved / Endorsed By: I VA4~2.. ` od so Tom Melymuk Manager, Customer & Administrative Director, Office of Sustainability Services ( -Chair eServices Team) Lynn Winterstein Gillis Paterson, CMA Manager, Marketing & Business Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer Development (Co-Chair eServices Team) i Nancy Johnst n , . Vera A. Felgemacher Website Coordinator CSMSP, CPPO, CPPB, CPM, CMM III Manager, Supply & Services jh/TM Approval 20// 6 P_4~~z f. I-If 4:4 -1 L4 Tony Prevedel, P.Eng. Chief Administrative Officer August 12, 2011 Page 5 RFP-3-2011 Website Redesign (cityofpickering.com) X, 131 1 ICKERING Memo P 1811 BICENTENNIAL 2011 To: Tom Melymuk August 11, 2011 Director, Office of Sustainability From: Vera A. Felgemacher Manager, Supply & Services Copy: Manager, Marketing and Business Development Subject: Request for Proposal. No, RFP-3-2011, Redesign of cityofpickering.com Submission Date: Monday, July 25, 2011, 12:00 Noon (local time) File: F-5300-001 Further to memo dated July 27, 2011 eleven (11) proposals' proceeded to Stage II of the evaluation process. Each member of the Evaluation Committee has completed evaluating the eleven (11). proposals, completing Stage II of the evaluation process. An Evaluation Committee meeting was held today at 10:00am and a combined average score for each proposal was determined. The combined average score of two (2) proposals passed the minimum scoring threshold, proceeding to Stage III of the evaluation process. Stage III consists of a scoring of the pricing submitted. At the conclusion of Stage III, all scores from Stage II and Stage III of proposals which passed the minimum threshold have been added. The highest ranking proponent is eSolutions and.their lump sum price is $96,350. In accordance with Purchasing Policy and Procedure PUR 010-001, Item 11.02-20, Council approval is required to award a proposal over $53,000. Resolution No #80/02 provides authority to the CAO to act in Council's approval capacity on behalf of Council during any recess, break or absence of City Council. However, debt financing must be approved by Council Please prepare a report to include the following items: (a) any past work experience with eSolutions Group; (b) without past work experience, if reference information is acceptable; (c) the appropriate account number(s) to which this work is to be charged; (d) the budget amount(s) assigned thereto; (e) Treasurer's confirmation of funding; (f) related departmental approvals; and (g) related comments specific to the ,project. PI ase do not disclose any information to enquiring proponents during this time - they will be advised of th ` outcome in due course. Please direct inquiries to Supply & Services. I If y require further information, please feel free to contact me or a member of Supply & Services. if VAF/jh Attachments i~ PICKERIN.G Memo 181 1 BICENTENNIAL 2011 To: Tom Melymuk July 27, 2011 Director, Office. of Sustainability From: Vera A. Felgemacher Manager, Supply & Services Copy: Manager, Marketing and Business Development Subject: Request for Proposal No. RFP-3-2011, Redesign of cityofpickering.com Submission Date: Monday, July 25, 2011, 12:00 Noon (local time) - File: F-5300-001 Request for proposals were invited from ten (10) companies and an advertisement was posted on the internet. Eleven (11) companies responded by the official submission date and time. Evaluation of proposals is performed in three (3) stages. Reference: Part 3, Evaluation of Proposals, Item 3.2 Stages of Proposal Evaluation: 3.2.1 Stage Stage I will consist of a review to determine which proposals comply with all of the mandatory requirements. Proposals failing to satisfy the mandatory requirements as of the Submission Date will be provided an opportunity to rectify any deficiencies. Proposals failing to satisfy the mandatory requirements as of the Rectification Date will be excluded from further consideration. 3.2.2 Stage II Stage II will consist of a scoring by the City.of each qualified proposal on the basis of the rated criteria. 3.2.3 Stage III Stage III will consist of a scoring of the pricing submitted. The evaluation of price will be undertaken after the evaluation of mandatory requirements and any rated requirements has been completed. 3.2.4 Cumulative Score At the conclusion of Stage III, all scores from Stage 11 and Stage III will be added and the highest ranking proponent will be selected for contract negotiations in accordance with Part 4. During Stage I, two (2) proposals were afforded the opportunity to rectify deficiencies and have complied. All eleven (11) proposals will proceed to Stage 11. M" .0 v CD S- G7 CD p co D D D ~ 3`~ (D = - ► o co 1;2 -S 0 . . . D c c (Cl ` a ` v m ~ < CD fD m ~ m 3 3 CD (D cD CD - N a CD n • • • . . wwww o s o ::E wwww v v o - CD : o n v O U) ° to w iv cn cn cn 0 co EY m CD -0 70 0 :3 0 0 CL c r ~~xmx~mv~ O° O cn Q ~G C~ v " -O =r cr O CL _0 v to cn m m~ ~3 N m a (n CZ :3 n CD CD co (D n M m -n o' o a5. to O O CL O 7 3 [D 3 r CD < o Q- 0 3 o v o' O 14, t AN t t < < 3 ° 3 _ m t t t D CU CD-D rn D p~CD CD - c CAD Q0 N 3 3 a' CD dM CD CD x M g rn All t t t t t t t t 3 (n 3 R 'o a -cr~ =3 CD W ~ N co (D N c3 CD ~ ? t t t. t t t t t t Qa0 w n a) 7 c En N 0. O t t ` t t t t < < c 0 < N 3 C ~ ~ ~D Iii (D O = Q CD 00 3 O N N :3.O N O' ~ t ~ t t ~ t t t ~ ~0 Qo 0 N -0.-Oft 0 CD G 3 n _ CD 0 a) m :3 X v ' . O O .=r -D Q O O .0 t t t t t t t All All t ~ 3 o v cnn O O O CD cn 71 11 O 0 CD CD _a (a (p c CD All t t t t t t t t o :3 O 3 Q --o N Q fn (D v cn =r CD a) t t t t t All 4.1 t t p:0 - O O p Co N 0, cn O y90 Z 3uD 3 Q. 5 CCD o CA CL CL (a CD ji. 0 a) (n o CD a) =r CL o- o :3 (n 3 mxz o 3 v. °n~ : mom c m mm D CL S. CD M CD =r m-, 0CL <D O m 0 cn (D CD 42 N) CD 0 3 0) 3 CD CD 2) (n CD (3D a r. n co 0 -4 to a 7' O' O c N 134 0 3 (n 17 CD p co D D. D CD CD 1, E CD CD U) CD U) D a3 o o z 0 LD. :3 (n CD CL O p (D C7 G) < (n O CL cn j O O Q. 7 ~D 77, CD 3 0 CD CD CD cn SU c% IIr; O tI1 : O O Z . A CD m 3 x 1 ID M o c) a cD IM N cn -n -0 C X M m O R D) W (D W tNriO a'~ ~ O O m 0 C (D lu a to cD ca m O N cc no. 3 < x v N m c c' ~ 3 CD CA m ~ ~ . cD N I .O► N O ~ -a (D ~O =CD . CD N p ° CD N n C O O ~ N Cl) --I t to 0--i Ct~ m> n o - 3 3 N ATTACHMENT # 3 TO REPORT #'S ADMINISTRATION DEPARTMENT . 1 3 5 CLERK'S DIVISION R E E;_ gyn.:. CITY OF FI MEMORANDUM MAYL 2002 CORPORAi E:'. S i vtt-;p." . :.May 27, 2002 TO: Tom Quinn, Chief Administrative Officer Gil Paterson, Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer FROM: Bruce Taylor, Clerk SUBJECT: Referrals from Council Meeting of May 21, 2002 Please be advised that the Council of the City of Pickering passed Resolution #80/02, Item #4, at the Council Meeting of May 21, 2002, as follows: 1. That Report to Council CAD 04-02 seeking authorization by the Chief Administrative Officer to act in Council's approval capacity on behalf of Council during any recess, break or absence of City Council be received; and 2. That subject to the Council approved Purchasing Policy & Procedure, the Chief Administrative Officer be authorized to act in Council's approval capacity on behalf of Council during any recess, break or absence of City Council on the condition that: a) such actions are in compliance with the Purchasing Policy & Procedure as approved under Resolution 136/01; and b) the costs thereof are within the budget previously approved by Council; and c) a report respecting those approvals is subsequently submitted to Council. 3. That appropriate officials of the City of Pickering be authorized to give effect thereto. Bruce Taylor BT:dk Copy: T.J. Quinn, Chief Administrative Officer ATTACHMENT #.,TO REPORT # C_5 3(0- 11 136 INTER-DEPARTMENTAL MEMORANDUM CLERK'S DIVISION RECEIVED DATE:. June 6 2000 CITY OF.,PICKERING JUN 'Q 6 2000 TO: G. Paterson CORPORATE SERVICES • birector, Corporate Services & Treasurer FROM: Bruce Taylor City. Clerk Please be advised that the Council of the City of Pickering `passed Resolution 85/00, Item #1 at the Council Meeting of June 5, 2000, as follows: That Report to Council CS 12-00 regarding authority for the Director, Corporate Services Treasurer,` to recommend project financing: approval during `recesses of Council be received, and 1. The Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer, be authorized to recommend and approve. project financing to the Mayor, and Chief Admmistrmtive Officer for projects contained in the annual capital budget or current budget, during recesses of City Council; and 2. That. appropriate officials 'of the.City of Pickering be authorized to give effect thereto. This resolution is sent to you for your information. Bruce Taylor, City Clerk cc. T.J. Quinn, Chief Administrative Officer Report To Executive Committee 1 ~KERIN Report Number: CAO 12-11 Date: September 12, 2011 137 From: Tony Prevedel Chief Administrative Officer Subject: Enhancement Projects in the City of Pickering - Southeast Collector Trunk Sewer - File: A-1440 Recommendation: 1. That Report CAO 12-11 of the Chief Administrative Officer, regarding the enhancement projects in the City of Pickering from the Southeast Collector Trunk Sewer project be received; 2. That Council approve the infrastructure, recreational and ecological enhancement projects as set out in Attachments #2 and #3 to this Report; such that Attachment #2 sets out the enhancement projects which constitute the $8.0 million of funds that are available, and Attachment #3 sets out additional enhancement projects that could be selected should the $8.0 million limit not be reached, or additional external funding for the Frenchman's Bay Harbour Entrance project not be secured; 3. That Council authorize the Mayor and Clerk to execute a Funding Agreement with the Regional Municipality of York respecting the enhancement projects, essentially as set out in Attachment #5 to this Report, in a form acceptable-to the City Solicitor and Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer; 4. That Council authorize staff to work on the implementation of the enhancement projects in the City of Pickering, as per the terms and conditions of the Funding Agreement, throughout the term of the Agreement; 5. That, notwithstanding the City's Purchasing Policy, City staff be authorized to enter into appropriate arrangements/contracts with the Toronto and Region Conservation Authority to undertake the ecological restoration enhancement projects E2, E3 and E5 at an estimated cost of $385,000, as identified in Attachment #2 to this Report; and as provided for in the approved 2011 Parks Capital Budget, project number 5780.1114; 6. That the implementation of enhancement projects be approved through the annual Capital Budget process during the period 2012 to 2017 recognizing that $3.0 million has been approved in the 2011 Capital Budget for projects that may commence in 2011; Report CAO 12-11 September 12, 2011 Subject: Enhancement Projects in the City of Pickering 138 Southeast Collector Trunk Sewer Page 2 7. That Council be advised that the Frenchman's Bay Harbour Entrance Project, approved in the 2010 Capital Budget as a 100% external grant funded project, will now require contributions from both the City of Pickering and York Region, and the project and revised funding will be reintroduced in the 2012 Capital Budget; 8. That a copy of Report CAO 12-11 be forwarded to the Regional Municipality of York, the Regional Municipality of Durham, Toronto and Region Conservation Authority, Durham District School Board, and the Durham District Catholic School Board for information; and 9. Further, that the appropriate officials of the City be authorized to take the necessary action to give effect hereto. Executive Summary: The co-proponents of the Southeast Collector Trunk Sewer (SEC) project, York and Durham Regions, have committed to providing a positive legacy to the local community most affected by the project during the SEC Individual Environmental Assessment process. Enhancements are initiatives that are beyond normal mitigation measures and are aimed at creating a lasting improvement to the environment and/or human community that would not otherwise be provided. Enhancements were recommended for the City of Pickering and the Town of Markham as both municipalities are impacted by, but do not directly benefit from, the project. The SEC Individual Environmental Assessment process created a list of recommended infrastructure, recreational and ecological enhancement projects through an extensive consultation process that included input from the public and stakeholders. Based on the list of potential community enhancements provided by York Region, staff forwarded Report OES 04-09 to the Executive Committee on January 12, 2009 with a list of City staff recommended infrastructure, recreational and ecological enhancement projects. Although the Report was endorsed by the Executive Committee, at the regular Council meeting of January 19, 2009, the Report was referred back to staff until all outstanding issues were addressed, specifically with respect to the location of the proposed odour control facility (OCF) south of Cherrywood West. In July 2010, a settlement agreement was reached between the City and York Region that resulted in Minutes of Settlement being signed that included a commitment of $8.0 million of mutually agreeable community enhancement projects for Council's approval. After the settlement agreement was reached, staff from Pickering, York, Durham, the Region's consultants, and TRCA have been working on determining appropriate enhancement projects, confirming their feasibility and preparing cost estimates. CORP0227-07/01 revised Report CAO 12-11 September 12, 2011 Subject: Enhancement Projects in the City of Pickering 13 Southeast Collector Trunk Sewer Page 3 It is recommended that Council approve the community enhancement projects presented in this report and authorize staff to work with York Region on the implementation of these projects in the City of Pickering, and have them incorporated into a Funding Agreement between York Region and the City of Pickering. Also, with Council's concurrence, City staff will enter into appropriate arrangements/contracts with TRCA to undertake three of the twelve ecological restoration enhancements identified in this Report, notwithstanding the provisions of the City's Purchasing Policy. Financial Implications: There are no financial implications related to adopting the recommendations of Report CAO 12-11 to Council. The City will benefit from $8.0 million worth of community enhancements to be implemented over the next several years in accordance with the Minutes of Settlement and the proposed Funding Agreement. However, future operation and maintenance costs related to the enhancement projects will be the responsibility of the City of Pickering. The specific enhancement projects and their estimated implementation costs will be brought forward to Council for approval through the annual Capital Budget process. Sustainability Implications: The Enhancement Plan is consistent with the City's five sustainable objectives of_a healthy environment, society, economy, responsible development and responsible consumption, as well as the City's more recently. established Corporate Priorities. Background: 1.1 Staff prepared Report IDES 04-09 on the infrastructure, recreational and ecological enhancement projects for Executive Committee's consideration On January 12, 2009, the Executive Committee considered Report OES 04-09 (Attachment #1) on the City staff recommended infrastructure, recreational and ecological enhancement projects. The Report also provided background information and discussion on the development of an enhancement plan. Staff recommended enhancement projects that were within the $8.0 million allocated for Pickering. Although the Report was endorsed by the Executive Committee, Council referred the Report back to staff until all outstanding issues were addressed, specifically with respect to the location of the proposed odour control facility (OCF) south of Cherrywood West. In response to Council and resident concerns, a new location for the OCF was proposed and subsequently approved on the west side of York Durham Line, north of Taunton Road within York Region. CORP0227-07/01 revised Report CAO 12-11 September 12, 2011 140 Subject: Enhancement Projects in the City of Pickering Southeast Collector Trunk Sewer Page 4 1.2 Minutes of Settlement between the City of Pickering and York Region was signed respecting the SEC and the Duffin Creek Water Pollution Control Plant In November 2009, the City initiated legal action against York Region concerning the SEC. On March 31, 2010, the Minister of Environment approved the SEC project by issuing the Notice to Proceed with the Undertaking, subject to a number of stringent conditions. The Minister of the Environment also included a commitment to enhancements in Bob Hunter Park in the Town of Markham, but no other enhancements were listed as a condition of approval. Subsequently, Council endorsed a settlement agreement between the City and York Region to not pursue or support a judicial review of the Minister's decision relating to the SEC project. Within the Minutes of Settlement is a commitment for York Region to fund $8.0 million of enhancements due to the SEC project, as well as an additional $2.32 million in enhancements in proximity to the Duffin Creek Water Pollution Control Plant as a result of the Stage 3 expansion. 2.0 Discussion 2.1 The implementation of an enhancement plan provides a positive legacy for Pickering Virtually all of the recommended enhancement projects remain consistent with York Region's commitment to leave a positive legacy for areas of Pickering impacted by construction of the SEC, and are consistent with the recent Minutes of Settlement. The Frenchman's Bay Harbour Entrance project, although not in close proximity to the SEC project, is a beneficial enhancement project for the broader City community and provides recreational, environmental and infrastructure enhancements. 2.2 A revised list of potential enhancements has been assembled by staff for consideration under the SEC project Staff from Pickering, York and Durham Region, their consultant AECOM Canada Limited, and TRCA have met frequently since October 2010, to refine staff's recommended list of infrastructure, recreational and ecological projects and the related cost estimates. A summary of all potential enhancements are outlined below. It is from this broader list that staff has created its refined list of high priority. enhancement projects in Section 2.3. CORP0227-07/01 revised Report CAO 12-11 September 12, 2011 141 Subject: Enhancement Projects in the City of Pickering Southeast Collector Trunk Sewer Page 5 • Infrastructure enhancements are primarily located in close proximity to the planned SEC project and includes the deck replacement and widening of the Palmer Bridge on Valley Farm Road north of Finch Avenue (crossing West Duffins Creek), including sidewalks on both sides to increase pedestrian safety and convenience. Other infrastructure enhancements include local road upgrades, Valley Farm Road spot improvements, full traffic control signals at the Finch Avenue and Maple Ridge Road/Bowler Drive intersection, and an Intersection Pedestrian Signal on Finch Avenue at Spruce Hill Road. • Recreational enhancements include new multi-use trail systems within the hydro corridor,.artificial turf to accommodate soccer and football at Beverley Morgan Park, and a Natural Heritage Educational Program. It should be noted that although the construction of a new multi-use trail system in the hydro corridor from Scarborough-Pickering Townline Road to Valley Farm Road has been identified and recommended in three segments, only the segment from Valley Farm Road to Liverpool Road is recommended as a high priority. Should the other two segments not be constructed using SEC enhancement funding, staff will continue to pursue continuation of the multi- use trail in the future through other funding sources and after extensive public consultation. • Ecological enhancements include restoration of the Rouge-Duffins wildlife corridor, restoration of lands within Petticoat Creek watershed, restoration of natural areas within the hydro corridor, naturalization within Maple Ridge Park, and reconstruction of the storm sewer outfall at Pine Creek. Other ecological enhancements include funding for the City's Environmental Awareness Programs and for the Durham District School Board's scholarship program and greening projects. Funding was provided earlier for the Petticoat Creek Watershed Study that is now completed. • Hybrid enhancement (infrastructure/recreational/ecological) includes the reconstruction of the Frenchman's Bay harbour entrance. The recently completed Municipal Class EA for the Frenchman's Bay Harbour Entrance concluded that the reconstruction of the entrance would create a safe harbour entrance that supports the marine functions of the Bay while preserving and enhancing the'ecological conditions of the Bay. Since the Frenchman's Bay Harbour Entrance project is not within the SEC study area boundaries, it was not included in the previous list of potential enhancements. However, it is a desirable project for the City to implement and will benefit not only residents within the study area, but all of the residents of the City of Pickering, and visitors to our waterfront. In recognition of the infrastructure, environmental and recreational benefits to the City as a whole, staff is recommending that partial funding for this CORP0227-07/01 revised Report CAO 12-11 September 12, 2011 142 Subject: Enhancement Projects in the City of Pickering Southeast Collector Trunk Sewer Page 6 estimated $9.0 million project be added to the list of high priority enhancements in Attachment 2, and be categorized as a hybrid project. Approximately $1.5 million has been allocated for this project from the SEC enhancement projects funding, with the balance being provided from a future shared municipal/provincial/federal funding program. The Frenchman's Bay Harbour Entrance project was approved in the 2010 Capital as an $8.0 million projected to be funded by a $4.0 million Federal grant and a $4.0 million Provincial grant. Staff is now recommending that the project be funded equally by the three levels of government as stated above, with Pickering's share being offset by a contribution from York Region through SEC enhancement project funding. It must be acknowledged, however, that should a municipal/provincial/federal grant program not be announced within the time frame of the enhancement plan, or the project not be accepted through a grant application, that the $1.5 million of SEC funds allocated for the project will be used for other enhancement projects as set out in Attachment #3 and subject to further Council approval. A map showing the location of all high priority and other enhancement projects is included as Attachment #4. 2.3 City staff have ranked all potential enhancement projects and their associated costs under three categories - high, medium and low priority The total estimated cost of all the potential enhancement projects exceeds the $8.0 million program allocated for Pickering. The enhancement projects have been evaluated by staff and have been ranked into three categories - high, medium and low priority. The enhancements that provide the highest benefit to the community are listed as high priority in Table 1 (see Attachment #2) and have a total estimated cost of $8.0, million. The medium and low priority enhancements are listed in Table 2 (see Attachment #3) and have a total estimated cost of $5.015 million. The following chart (Summary of Table 1) indicates staff's recommendation to . Council of the high priority enhancement projects and their associated cost estimates which total $8.0 million. CORP0227-07/01 revised Report CAO 12-11 September 12, 2011 1 A. 3 Subject: Enhancement Projects in the City of Pickering Southeast Collector Trunk Sewer Page 7 Summary of Table 1 High Priority Enhancement Projects and Estimated Costs Infrastructure Enhancements Estimated Cost 11 Palmer Bridge Deck Replacement (widening) $2,185,000 12 Upgrade of Local Roads (Rosebank Road) 450,000 13 Intersection Pedestrian Signal (Finch Avenue at Spruce 100,000 Hill Road) 14 Upgrade of Local Roads (Third Concession Road) 490,000 Subtotal 3,225,000 Recreation Enhancements R1 Multi-Use Trail (Valley Farm Road to Liverpool Road) 425,000 R2 Soccer/Football Field Upgrade at Beverly Morgan Park 1,435,000 Subtotal 1,860,000 Ecological Enhancements. E1 Restoration along West Duffins Creek and Trail 85,000 E2 Restoration of Rouge Duffins Corridor 150,000 E3 Restoration of Lands within Petticoat Creek Watershed 175,000 E4 Naturalization of Maple Ridge Park 25,000 E5 Restoration on TRCA lands near Townline Road 60,000 E6 Pine Creek Outfall Reconstruction 500,000 E7 Funding for Environmental Awareness Programs 100,000 E8 Southeast Collector Scholarship Fund 200,000 E9 School Board Enhancements (green projects) 100,000 E10 Petticoat Creek Watershed Action Plan * 20,000 Subtotal 1,415,000 Hybrid Enhancement H1 Frenchman's Bay Harbour Entrance Reconstruction 1,500,000 Total 8,000,000 previously funded The following chart (Summary of Table 2) indicates staffs recommendation to Council of the other remaining enhancement projects and their associated costs, listed in Table 2 (see Attachment #3). If the external additional funding that is required for the Frenchman's Bay Harbour Entrance project is not secured by December 31, 2014, or if the actual cost of the completed high priority projects is less than estimated, projects from Table 2 will be selected and recommended to Council for approval to meet the $8.0 million commitment. If the actual cost of the enhancement projects in Table 1 CORP0227-07/01 revised Report CAO 12-11 September 12, 2011 1ubject: Enhancement Projects in the City of Pickering Southeast Collector Trunk Sewer Page 8 exceed the $8.0 million commitment, either one or more of the projects will not be undertaken, or additional funds from the City will be required, subject to Council approval. Summary of Table 2 Other Enhancement Projects and Estimated Costs Infrastructure Enhancements Estimated Cost 15 Upgrade of Local Roads (Scarborough/Pickering Townline $ 900,000 Road) 16 Valley Farm Road/Palmer Bridge Area Enhancements 570,000 (minor widening to accommodate bike lanes and sidewalk) 17 Traffic Flow Improvements at Maple Ridge Drive and Finch 635,000 Avenue 18 Valley Farm Road/Palmer Bridge Area Enhancements 260,000 (replace gabion basket wall north of Bloomfield Court) 19 Valley Farm Road/Palmer Bridge Area Enhancements 215,000 (improve sight distance at Bloomfield Court) Subtotal 2,580,000 Recreation Enhancements R3 Multi-Use Trail (Liverpool Road to Whites Road) 860,000 R4 Multi-Use Trail (Whites Road to Townline Road) 1,400,000 R5 Natural Heritage Education Programming 25.000 Subtotal 2,285,000 Ecological Enhancements E11 Restorations of Areas in Proximity to Multi-Use Trail 90,000 (Liverpool Road to Whites Road) E12 Restorations of Areas in Proximity to Multi-Use Trail 60,000 (Whites Road to Townline Road) Subtotal 150,000 Total $5,015,000 2.4 A Funding Agreement with York Region respecting the enhancement projects is required York Region has committed to an upset amount of $8.0 million for community enhancements in Pickering due to the SEC project. Pursuant to this CORP0227-07/01 revised Report CAO 12-11 September 12, 2011 14 Subject: Enhancement Projects in the City of Pickering Southeast Collector Trunk Sewer Page 9 commitment is the requirement for York Region and the City to execute a Funding Agreement (see Attachment #5 - Draft Funding Agreement). The Draft Funding Agreement has been reviewed and discussed amongst the parties but is still being negotiated. Once the Funding Agreement is in a form acceptable to staff, the Mayor and Clerk will be able to execute the Funding Agreement with York Region respecting the community enhancement projects. 2.5 In recognition of TRCA's knowledge and experience, staff recommends that TRCA be retained by the City to undertake certain ecological restoration enhancements identified in Table 1 Three of the ecological enhancement projects are located on TRCA lands and within the Rouge-Duffins Wildlife Corridor. The restoration of the natural areas support the corridor's function as a vegetation connector between the Rouge and Duffins Valley systems. TRCA's Restoration Services Section has considerable knowledge, experience and success in undertaking restoration projects in Pickering and elsewhere in the Greater Toronto Area. TRCA staff are professionally trained in the field of terrestrial and aquatic habitat restoration. The City of Pickering's purchasing policy requires that formal quotations or tenders be called for the provision of goods and services at the proposed dollar value for these works. Based on TRCA's experience and expertise, and their involvement in the feasibility analysis and cost estimation of the ecological restoration enhancements, staff is recommending that Council provide authorization to retain TRCA to undertake the restoration works identified in E2, E3 and E5 of Table 1 at a cost not to exceed $385,000. City staff would review, approve and manage the required works to be performed by TRCA, and issue payment upon satisfactory completion. Both the Director, Community Services and Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer have- been consulted with regard to this matter and concur with this recommendation. All other ecological enhancement projects would be procured in adherence to the City's Purchasing Policy. Although the Frenchman's Bay Harbour Entrance project will occur on lands that are in the process of being transferred to TRCA by the Pickering Harbour Company, there is no commitment at this time that the construction will be undertaken by the TRCA. 2.6 A portion of the SEC Funds has been allocated to the Durham District School Board and the Durham Catholic District. School Board to establish a SEC Scholarship Fund and to assist in greening projects CORP0227-07/01 revised Report CAO 12-11 September 12, 2011 146 Subject: Enhancement Projects in the City of Pickering Southeast Collector,Trunk Sewer Page 10 For enhancement projects E8 and E9 of Table 1, approx $150,000 has been allocated to each of the two Durham District School Boards (total of $300,000) for schools in Pickering to establish a SEC Scholarship Fund and to fund greening projects developed and undertaken by individual schools. York Region are agreeable to having a scholarship funding agreement executed by the four parties (York Region, City of Pickering, and the two District School Boards) for the scholarship fund. Our initial review of the draft scholarship funding agreement suggests that the City's role is simply administrative in nature, in order to flow the funds from York Region to the School Boards. Our recommendation is that York Region include both the E8 and E9 projects in one funding agreement directly with the School Boards and not include the City as party to the agreement. These discussions with York Region and the School Boards are still ongoing. 2.7 Funding for the Petticoat Creek Watershed Action Plan has been received from York Region In 2009, the City of Pickering received a funding contribution of $20,000 from the SEC Project as flow-thru funding for the Petticoat Creek Watershed Action Plan being undertaken by TRCA. The City also contributed $10,000 toward this Action Plan earlier in 2008. A draft of the Watershed Action Plan for Petticoat Creek has been prepared and is currently under revision. 3.0 Next Steps Council's approval of the enhancement plan will enable staff to collaborate with York Region on implementing the projects planned for the 2011 to 2017 time period. It is recommended that staff be authorized to finalize the Funding Agreement with York Region respecting the enhancement projects. With Council's concurrence, City staff will enter into appropriate arrangements/contracts with TRCA to undertake the ecological restoration works identified in this Report. In order to communicate Council's acceptance of the community enhancement projects, staff will prepare a media release, have information available on the City website, and display information boards in the lobby of the Civic Complex. City staff will provide periodic update reports on the status of the SEC enhancements as milestones are reached, during the Capital Budget process in future years, and through Reports to Council to award tenders related to enhancement project delivery. CORP0227-07/01 revised Report CAO 12-11 September 12, 2011 ~ Subject: Enhancement Projects in the City of Pickering 47 Southeast Collector Trunk Sewer Page 11 Attachments: 1. Report OES 04-09 (without attachments) 2. Table 1 - High Priority Enhancement Projects 3. Table 2 - Other Enhancement Projects 4. Map of SEC Enhancement Projects 5. Draft Funding Agreement Prepared By: Approved/Endorsed By: AM~kAAAPUI~~ Grant McGregor, MCIP RPP Eve Bunts a, NPD, CMM Principal Planner - Policy Director, Community Services Manager, Policy Ric and W. Ho orn, P.Eng Neil Carroll, P vision Head, Engineering Services Director, Planning & Development Gillis A. Paterson, CMA Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer GM:RH:ds Attachments Recommended for the consideration of Pickering Cit Council 2l, Lot/ Tony Prevedel, P.Eng Chief Administrative Officer CORP0227-07/01 revised 14 8 ATTACHMENT# L TO~REPORT# C.AO Iz-1I cf City, REPORT TO Ayftaakl~ EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE PICKERING Report Number: OES 04-09 Date: January 12, 2009 From: Everett Buntsma .Director, Operations & Emergency Services Subject: Southeast Collector Trunk Sewer Individual Environmental Assessment Enhancement Projects in the City of Pickering File: A-1440 Recommendation: 1. That Report OES 04-09 of the Director, Operations & Emergency Services and the Director, Planning & Development, regarding the enhancement projects for the Southeast Collector Trunk Sewer be received; 2. That Council endorse the ecological, recreational and infrastructure enhancement projects as set out in Attachment #2 to Report OES 04-09; 3. That Council authorize staff to work with York Region on finalizing and implementing the enhancement projects in the City of Pickering; and 4. That a copy of Report OES 04-09 be forwarded to the Region of York, Region of Durham, Toronto and Region Conservation Authority, Durham District School Board, Durham Catholic School Board, and Rouge Park Alliance for information. Executive Summary: In February, 2006, the. Minister of Environment approved Terms of Reference (ToR) for the Southeast Collector Trunk Sewer (SEC) project. The ToR required a mitigation plan as well as the development of an enhancement plan as part of the Individual Environmental Assessment (IEA) process. Enhancements are aimed at creating a lasting improvement to the environment and/or human community that would not otherwise be provided through the IEA process. The co-proponents, York and Durham Regions, have committed to providing a positive legacy to the local community affected by the SEC project through an enhancement plan. The SEC process. solicited ideas from the public and stakeholders on ecological, recreational and infrastructure enhancements through extensive consultation process with City of Pickering staff, community associations, school boards, Toronto and Region Conservation Authority, Rouge Park Alliance, and individual citizens. City staff also prepared and submitted a preliminary list of potential enhancements to the co- proponents in February, 2008. The list was submitted with the understanding that it could be altered or added to by Pickering Council. ATTACHMENT #--L TOREPORT# 149 Z Report OES 04-09 of January 12, 2009 Subject: Southeast Collector Trunk Sewer Individual Environmental Assessment Enhancement Projects in the City of Pickering Page 2 On November 20, 2008, York Region Council adopted a report outlining recommended . enhancement projects for the SEC with an approximate expenditure of $15 Million ($8 Million in Pickering). Of the 39 recommended ecological, recreational and infrastructure enhancements, 24 enhancements are to be located in Pickering, however, several key enhancements provided by City staff to the co-proponents were not included. The report also recommended a separate commitment to the Duffin Creek Water Pollution Control Plant Stage 3 Expansion Greening/Biodiversity Plan at an estimated cost of $350,000. That commitment is not discussed further in this report and will be reported on at a later date. Subsequently, City staff met with the co-proponents to review, discuss and revise the recommended enhancement projects for Pickering. The ecological enhancements recommended within the Seaton Natural Heritage System were requested to be deleted as they are more appropriate for consideration in the context of the Natural Heritage System Management Plan process. The removal of the ecological enhancements provided staff with the opportunity to add several key infrastructure projects including the reconstruction of the Palmer Bridge on Valley Farm Road, improvements to the Beverley Morgan and Maple Ridge Parks and to shift the proposed pedestrian bridge over Duffins Creek to a location in Brockridge Park. In staff's opinion, these infrastructure projects are in closer proximity to the SEC route, promote community connectivity and do not exceed the $8 Million program initially allocated for Pickering in York's report. It is recommended that Council endorse the revised enhancement projects recommended by staff and authorize staff to work with York Region to refine the enhancement projects in the City of Pickering, and have them incorporated into an agreement between York Region and the City of Pickering. Financial Implications: None to adopt the recommendations of this Report to Council. If approved, the Enhancement Plan would result in a value of approximately $8 million of enhancement projects being undertaken in the City of Pickering. Sustainability Implications: The Enhancement Plan is consistent with the City's five sustainable objectives of a healthy environment, society, economy, responsible development and responsible consumption. CORP0227-07/01 revised ATTACHMENT#___ TOREPORT# ~/-~D la-I 0 Report OES 04-09 °---0t g January 12, 2009 Subject: Southeast Collector Trunk Sewer Individual Environmental Assessment Enhancement Projects in the City of Pickering Page 3 BACKGROUND: 1.1 The Region of York was required to carry out an IEA for the Southeast Collector Trunk Sewer from 9th Line in Markham to Valley Farm Road in Pickering In October, 2004, the Minister of Environment informed York Region that an Individual Environmental Assessment was required for the remaining unfinished sections of the York-Durham Sewage System (YDSS) including the Southeast Collector Trunk Sewer project from 9th Line in Markham to Valley Farm Road in Pickering. As the Regions jointly own and operate the existing SEC Trunk Sewer, York and Durham Regions agreed to be co-proponents for the SEC Trunk Sewer IEA. 1.2 A commitment was made to the Province to develop an enhancement plan as part of the SEC Individual Environmental Assessment process In February, 2006, the 'Minister of Environment approved the Terms of Reference including not only the requirement for a mitigation plan but also stipulating development of an enhancement plan as part of the Individual Environmental Assessment process. Infrastructure projects such as the SEC are required to mitigate adverse effects on the environment or compensate for the adverse effects. Mitigation measures are used to avoid the adverse impact where possible, minimize the adverse impact if it cannot be avoided, or rehabilitate/restore the environment after construction. Enhancements are initiatives that go beyond mitigation and compensation measures to create improvements to the environment and/or human communities that would not otherwise be provided through the EA process.. The co-proponents have committed to providing a positive legacy to the local community affected by the SEC project through the formulation of an Enhancement Plan. 1.3 The SEC project included an. extensive public consultation process to solicit input on enhancements To develop the enhancements, the SEC process included extensive consultation with local community groups, stakeholders and agencies on Ecological, Recreational and Infrastructure Enhancements (ERIE). Consultation in Pickering included the following: • Project website • Project phone hot-line • Resident outreach held in late August/early September 2007 CORP0227-07/01 revised ATTACHMENT #:__L_ TO~REPORT#O' I)-11 Report OES 04-09 mot January 12, 2009 Subject: Southeast Collector Trunk Sewer Individual Environmental Assessment Enhancement Projects in the City of Pickering Page,4 • A series of Neighborhood Sessions held in late November/early December 2007 • Newsletter • Two Public Information Sessions held on April 15 and 17, 2008 This process also included several meetings with community associations, school boards, Toronto and Region Conservation Authority, individual citizens, stakeholders-, Pickering staff and agencies. Public consultation was focused along the recommended preferred route which would be most impacted by project construction. 1.4 A preliminary list of twenty potential enhancements was submitted to the co-proponents for consideration At a meeting held on January 25, 2008, the co-proponents informed City staff of the selection approach to be used for the enhancement plan and requested a preliminary list of enhancements. City staff submitted a preliminary list of twenty potential enhancements for consideration. This list was also distributed to Mayor and Council as CAO Correspondence (CAO-07-08) dated March 14, 2008. Further CAO Correspondence (CAO-54-08) dated November 25, 2008 advised of _ the near completion of the SEC project and provided additional information on the enhancements. 1.5 York Regional Council adopted Report No. 9 of its Transportation and Works Committee regarding enhancements projects for the Southeast Collector Trunk Sewer On November 20, 2008, York Regional Council adopted Report No. 9 of its Transportation and Works Committee regarding enhancements for the SEC. Many of the enhancements were not detailed in the report; however, an approximate expenditure of $15 Million ($8 Million in Pickering) was identified and recommended (see Attachment #1 - Recommended Enhancements). The report also recommended a commitment to the Duffin Creek Water Pollution Control Plant Stage 3 Expansion Green ing/Biodiversity Plan at an estimated cost . of $350,000. That commitment is not discussed further in this report but will be reported on at a later date. A copy of Report No. 9 (CORR. 113-08) was provided to Council on December 15, 2008 by the City Clerk. CORP0227-07/01 revised 5 2 ATTAC HMENT#..-..' TOREPORT# CaQ lo~'I ) Report OES 04-09 of g January 12, 2009 Subject: Southeast Collector Trunk Sewer Individual Environmental Assessment Enhancement Projects in the City of Pickering Page 5 DISCUSSION 2.1 The development and implementation of an enhancement plan provides a positive legacy for Pickering The enhancements planned under the SEC project will leave a positive legacy for areas of Pickering impacted by construction of the trunk- sewer. The magnitude of the enhancements proposed by York Region are considered reasonable in light of the Memorandum of Understanding signed between the City and York Region regarding the expansion of the Southeast Collector and Duffin Creek WCP. 2.2 The replacement of the Seaton _ ecological enhancements with key infrastructure enhancements provides greater. positive improvements to the environment and community A number of ecological enhancements such as creating snake habitats and enhancing swamp habitats were identified on Provincially owned lands in the Seaton Community. Subsequently, a meeting was held with the co-proponents and their consultants to review and discuss the SEC project list of enhancements for Pickering. Staff advised the co-proponents that the ecological enhancements in Seaton should be not be provided through the SEC p roject as they are considered as elements of the Province's Natural Heritage System Management Plan. Staff's comments on York Region's enhancement list are provided in Attachment #1. 2.3 A revised list of enhancements are recommended by staff for consideration under the SEC project Removal of the ecological enhancements in Seaton provided staff with the opportunity to add several key enhancements projects that provide greater positive improvements to the environment and community. These additional enhancements are within the $8 million program initially allocated for Pickering (see Attachment #2 - Recommended Enhancements). Attachment 93 shows the location of the recommended ecological, recreational and infrastructure enhancements. A summary of the enhancements are outlined below: Ecological enhancements include restoration of the Rouge-Duffins wildlife corridor, restoration of streams in Petticoat Creek, reforestation of the Nu West ravine, and assistance with funding of the Petticoat Creek Watershed Study. A Whitevale Drainage Study to address local flooding and stormwater conveyance problems is added to the list. CORP0227-07/01 revised AT M:ACHMENT#- ~ TO REPORT# i 140 1,1 ~ 153 Report OES 04-09 of g January 12, 2009 Subject: Southeast Collector Trunk Sewer Individual Environmental Assessment Enhancement Projects in the City of Pickering Page 6 Recreational enhancements include existing trail system extension for the Seaton Trail, new multi use trail systems in the hydro corridor, and consideration of "buy locally" tendering clause for the SEC project. An enhancement for artificial turf to accommodate soccer and football at Beverley Morgan Park in lieu of soccer fields on Provincially owned lands located south of the Third Concession Road, west of Valley Farm Road is recommended. Infrastructure enhancements are primarily located in close proximity to the planned SEC project and include traffic flow, pedestrian and streetscaping improvements on Finch Avenue, and full traffic control signals at the Finch Avenue and Maple Ridge Road/Bowler Drive intersection. A strategic enhancement being recommended is the reconstruction of Palmer Bridge on Valley Farm Road north of Finch Avenue (crossing West Duffins Creek) including sidewalks on both sides to increase pedestrian safety and convenience. 2.4 A portion of the funds allocated to the Durham District School Board should also be used to assist the City in upgrading facilities within two parks (Maple Ridge Park and Beverley Morgan Park) adjacent to schools On York Region's recommended enhancement list, approx $130,000 has been allocated for Durham District.School Board enhancements such as landscape improvements to school properties. Adjacent to the Maple Ridge Public School and Pine Ridge Secondary School are two City parks that are currently used by students and other community residents. Maple Ridge Park has a soccer field, baseball diamond and tennis courts in need of repair and. upgrade. Beverley Morgan Park has similar deficiencies and also requires bleachers to be replaced. Staff is recommending that the co-proponents allocate a portion of the School Board's funds to assist in the upgrading of these facilities within the two parks. 2.4 Funding for the Petticoat Creek Watershed Strategy has been received from York Region The City of Pickering requested consideration of a funding contribution of $20,000 from the SEC Project for a strategy for the Petticoat Creek Watershed being undertaken by the Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) The City also contributed $10,000 toward this Strategy earlier in 2008. The co- proponents have accepted the City's request for a contribution toward the Petticoat Creek Watershed Strategy and subsequently, forwarded the funds to the City for this project. These funds have been forwarded to the TRCA. CORP0227-07/01 revised 154 ATTACHMENT 4-L TO REPORT# C140 Report OES 04-09 ot- January 12, 2009 Subject: Southeast Collector Trunk Sewer Individual Environmental Assessment Enhancement Projects in the City of Pickering Page 7 2.5 The revised list of enhancements is consistent with the commitment made by the co-proponents to the Minister of Environment to leave a positive legacy for Pickering Formal EA approval of the enhancement plan is not required as the co- proponents have satisfied the commitment made to the Minster of Environment to develop an enhancement plan. Pickering's list of enhancement changes remains consistent with the principle of leaving a positive legacy for the community. It is also the co-proponents' intention to continue to refine the enhancement plan in consultation with the City and other stakeholders following EA approval of the SEC project. 3.0 Next Steps Council's endorsement of the revised list of enhancements will enable staff to collaborate with York Region on refining and implementing the projects planned for the 2010-2012 time period. In the future, a formal agreement with the Regional Municipality of York respecting the final enhancement projects will be required. Attachments: 1. York Region Recommended Enhancement Projects 2. City of Pickering Recommended Enhancement Projects 3. Map of City of Pickering Recommended Enhancement Projects CORP0227-07/01 revised ATTACH MEN!'#-_ - TO REPORT# C OO (2-11 155 Report OES 04-09 of-~.-- January 12, 2009 Subject: Southeast Collector Trunk Sewer Individual Environmental Assessment Enhancement Projects in the City of Pickering Page 8 Prepared By: Approved/Endorsed By: Grant McGregor, MCI R RPP Neil Carr , RPP Principal Planner - Policy Director, Planning & Development 7 Y-hard W. olborn, P.Eng. Everett untsma, n Head Director pal Property & Engineering Operations & Emergency Services RH/GM:ds: Copy: Chief Administrative Officer Recommended for the consideration of Pickering City cil , ~i as J. Q Vin, RD CMM III Chief Admini tive Officer CORP0227-07/01 revised I ATTACH MENT#--.L- TO REPORT# C RO la' ~ ~ of /0 6 15 _ U) s N r = m d H N = a' LL c i OLE _ .p 0 7 0 p~ 7 F- d d IM 4) J9 W O C O CD H p 0 L. 0 U. LL Q CL , 0, ~ c~- Y >,e~a ~ o• o ~o = F-O yca C4 s W V U >U N W 'v d O d0 ~ 4) O o C c~ 2 Q.o 4) 0 Q. ai E~ m E~ a` (LW 0c0 ~o¢c°>a i w c H ~ 4) ~ o d C1 Q o ~ c o -a c HN ao ,o i W V 40 d N w m c c > o o d C .O N N n 4) cc >O c 's 7 > V f6 E O O O Y = N Q O L B o N E U) 75 a~ o Z -a rn 0 ca cc _5 O W .c E ° c c~ CD c O U ZT a ca rn o p c F co •L (q LL C o o -0 co z Z N L N Y 'O O d a W W N Q -a a) o v L s.+ s W w > co - co O cn 2 Z Z o a) o> cu N = Q o O U a~ 0 comas o W Z 4) ca S-0 N -Np O O N W Y O c Q (D 0, N W v L c- Lo E a) W N c c 0) :3 W v Q) US C o Q N L -0 cc c QU 3=.= 0 Y'` 3 c m O N ° a co c O O c c ` E 'E (D L ED m L- 0 U) 0 A AA mA A CL 0 a) Z a ~ 0A MA A O r N Z - - ATTACHMENT# 'Z TO REPORT# CID 12-11 - of --LO- E 20 7 U) 0 O N G1 O C d= V > V A ~ C. O Y. Q,0 L s p=M = AC. ea -a ca m CL U) ~ Z O L N y d d N_ m ~ Y W 'y w L 0 r- 'Q N CD L O p s d y U Q U- 4) CL CD 0 Q2 U 4) G) d ` 4) ~o Ot C. o A~ f-O 21) = m ~a ot. ~N O1r o ss cnv ~*J 4)" 3~ 3 >+w = U) C.) .0 4) aQ _ 4) > ~t eva V 0 d 7 C ea s -O 2 V Q 2 O 3 C. d C• O s O 2).E O ma C. L d as O O M ~ V 0 U- ~ .E m CL 5 O D 0 C. A A o c c p ~ °o m CD oo as ° Q Q V = p V = N ~F o 0 = N y0 ca z ° CW) O V CW) O M W U V EA V if? L d ' O L 4) CL N LL N t~ G O co) CL = 0 tm p Q a+ O (D E U O 0~ 4) =3 c cu U) ` C 'O N i E Q Q O ~O 0 r a) 3: -0 V ~ U O O O O ~ v s W c c rn -0 0 4) c: 75 a Q c N d v U) ".3 .O - V cn m N = ~ p Z o a = 2 0 o ea • = O O U t d U. N cn V m s W o N 'a c O v O U O c c t N > t fa co) m = Q Cf D 2 ~ "O > O c = o ca O N W z = i O O O E W cu m ` U L C r c c o rn in- cn r v N C 7 N M CL "m cu ^ J c 3: c O c U c cn N O E V> v c = O O ~ O O O U V N Of O C a-2 Q c . c H Q- w n i •a ca co O d cU) cQQ Q c~ U~ = DA mA DA MA A N O Z M ATTACHMENT #--L- TO REPORT# CA 0-If L O r 'a ch d ~ Q O ~ ~ ~ O W v N N 'a ea O_ O •O Z C ` ` 'Q W Ow Ct~ m c tip ~O m. 00 LL. qe 4 CD b- 0 E U) 0 co 0 =O ca r a` 00 • _ .0 r- O L H y O 4) O 0 ca to O v O a~ H=~ N Q= d ~ v W = Q p, d ~ N 0 V C W) O W V r V d ~O V c co Y c F E Q _ . E to Q. O O E I Q ~ c c-0 IL Y U U Y = ca N U C d 0~ O ` N.~ _ cn U d i~ r O co ca c p E U) _ U V t W I •x _0 c d O cu C a) ca cn c OW vC. o~ °-rn Lc U a •LeQa a~ ca ca cao 0_, cam c -0 U m.1- z U) w a O s 2 z EQ-~a> cam c W W a(D U cn Z_. > c O Am z Cc LL co) 0 Q (D Q Q N2 v 0 CL W C ?o~~a? ccaE Z z cace% ) W = 0 > O c V `0c C. >mca z m° oV ca E o m cu'o 4-- . _ CA a cc •D 7 U J Q Q O co >'•E 5 E Z • = N U U 0 E c *21 E (1) U c O co r- L- a) cn L) co) U E U U Q d m O C -0 U r W T Q 5 L p p cu V N V N cc n..~` Fes- (n ~A A mA O ~ Z ATTACHMENT#TO REPORT# of to 159 ~ ° d ~ = O m m H H 4) Z r~ W O C) 0 d N U om ~ Q4' C O t C Q2 70 O 0Z = v ch w HO Nv N O O O L. t: t -W p = 3 Q > C O Y L O a o = t > V CL W CL W w L ~ i W °oc H ~0 Q L c c °o 1- m co :w o H.2,0- 00, c L w0 cW O r ER co W V d m c (n CA :3 T o ~ ~ cc (D CD -c M co cc m U) (L -co cm - " cd a 0(n 1 4) o°~ `Ua- ` N _ m U co m F' U a) U) c (`6 C U Q N c0 C c O C O tm ~ E N 0 f6 ca ca O U U (n rn O d -0 Q co E Co -0 co 0 0 .2 6. Ica xc CL (aa) ca c4)4) OW L) CL 0 CL (D 0 cn o a) ~O Z m coo tea) > WMo m(a L. 2 m c72 cc d y z >~a oc'(a ~t W d cmo a•~ v H o c U W C cn 2 Z T 0-0 °cc w O U) i7L c 4) a°i o 2 2 3: (D 0 (D 0 (1) W V m e 4)) o c' 4- z L -w :2 (D co m U. m° 40 a) O = a ca E c m (D (D w C - ca a) D ~ C c0 m cc d Q O-0 O Q N (n H 0 C V c: Lp C U a) mc cu O c co c a) ~ O ~ c cc cu - - cu ca a) 0 O Y F i T co Cc U. c c QED a) o-0 O O ~("n ° a~ Lr- r- v vvia cl- O H W NWUO ca!OW d U) DA MA U) W ~C) DA A MA A 04 Z w I 160 ATTACHMENT#~TOREPORT# S L R = LO Z c 0 m e c o ea d r = O as H j 3 am 3 N. Q p N! t C CL 4) Q0 ~G = V c = V C) ' c O c w E v L N E 0 V i d V d H1 o0 c3Q ~QO c3 Q > CL IOU CL M 4) Q 4) mI 3 c.>~ CL IX W ~H JH C. W ~H G ~ O O Q CD O co U EA W d4 d d a) 4) O c t > ° i (0 y Q ° Q ,O c O N N a C ° d ( C 0 c = d v 0) V 4) 7 Q 2. E -0 3 0 co o coo ai U H' v O Q.C)~ ~.S c~ C c t- :a c m m o Y (D LL a ca vt W O t c O ° O 4)L 0W .2 :E Ica .r v)o v~ U a _ 0 3 rn) 0 cv c a 4- m co D 0 c.5~ c o cC ' ( d L Lu a> - a O 0 ° ca a> . _ M L w c Co o ) c m 0 a► tJ a) ° m 'c: ° O O tq2 Q U) ~ c> c cQ 32 = m ° 0 o -c z C7 J M 7 N~ (D E Q •3 Q v c° c M 4) ° f4 c L C ~ O f6 O .C_ ~ cu m Q O 3i co J U) O cu ° f6 0 cx c c0 y..~ C C N O O L O O p ch .2- co O c.c.E O cLa 'Fo O N c m c M a) N w ~C c _ O + R 0 O- O L O L- co -0 cn -a p c 'c O° (D O CL co CL 4) O C 7 ca Of CL N co c~ c H 7 ~ CJ) C DA O mA OCR A m A I Z w W ATTACHMENT#. TO REPORT# C'90 /O 161 C d N H .3 to 10 V 4) ul po 00 O O m M = Q 0 U) 7 0 O c v t/) C~ W A w _ U) 0 7 V d O p r c 3 Q 4) CL > c 4) 4) c aW aW w L~ 0 w Q CD CD ~F o 0 ~ N N to EA w C) d G1 C C C L (6 O) a) c Y a) O U 5 W N U Q c 0 N d v E m ~ C c c O O W E O co c F' N L V m f0 -O N cu 9) f V m 0) o vt w cQ p Q 0 d = C Q O w N C v N co) N ` O a) U) c a) O 3 cL 4.~ itt .19 c cca - Q 0 0) t W (L ca 0.0) m cu ~ca c Z .a ` U U) LO Q owns m LL a) c R Z d o r- m cu c U=_ p w ' L o Q ° O m me V Q 6 0 w- 4- m cv H o o 0 o n -O Q- N o o a) cm c c a> c Q ccu a) T-ci p csm L o' C C O o L N t +r . O a) to Q n ca n ' Q c N. (D U (D U 4? U) c co c Z 0A mA w DA mA • ~ ~ o Z w w ATTACHMENT# 01- TO REPORT# (!4 la-~I 162 m C5 L ett = 3 . O 4) O U 0 O = 7 d N d C. = O ,0 L M SO- E . O O O H v H H E p C z CL o EE U. 0 3v tc s- Im'o L. _o c Q N C!# t } cam = u) E 0 4) U) V v i c m~ Q' U) c O s CO OA = C 0 G) O y 3 2 O r V CD O N Lo d aC)o Hs w Lw H m d i w c 00 LA 4) O O V C O o H O V C O N p O ~ U) O W V EA r u E9 L O N U) U o E ^ N N N Q' c o 3~ c o c -c a ~ -0 CL =3 E J4 = O LO N d CD cu _ d ca c i Y O m N N O H 0 0 0 O 0 0 0 x MA /L~ O C F U (1) (D 4w M G> _ -1) C O 3 R OC)) O N 0 4.0 a) N C U Q to V ' d U O co o a) 0 a- > c a W =3 N c6 No Z ap ~L o E q) d ~L W C p C N aN t o O L a• O CD CO -0 t W + O 'O co O LL co LO O > C U ` O c s3f O d co •O Q N O~ ~C > c (n c~ C L O N c Y N W G1 O V N N Y V O o N i a 3 co O ~ U O a Q U U) W a- 0) cn 0) 0 p N N C~ O m > <n = L E ' - Y O N N O O O L) C c " co 0 Q V N w O O r d ~ O U Q~ ~ = -a L E V C N O:3 4-- N +6 _ Q- O C EO ~ 4-: _ ~LL U Cwfn C 0LLW U 0O a OA mAA LL DA mA Z W W ATTACHMENT#. TORE PORT #0,40 z-/l - of IQ 163 .00 mN a 00 °'00 o o s s ca 5s ca ~ ~~m 00 cN ~ 000 cN CL 0 w m CL 0 F m o 0 0 +r ~ v , L C L LL 2 c Q. O c 0 0 42 0 -0 00 ~ m c y~ cn E3c 0 4) U) U m. Q i L AW O 0~ L CL c z O O E N 0 v 0 0 O s£ ca O .0 O s d .a O O = 0,0 3 co p W i •d CL. Q O O ~ !C aL v 3 'V-, acm s0 a. 4 Q m s° o w Q o O F- . to o °o uj L O d ~ ~ O V1 O c o r 0 .2 Q O co) m O LO "a co E N a O O N Z' a) O O > O Y= 5 U ccn0 O O d cu E a) m n O M x = p cA co cu Q -0 0 L m d -0 -c >'c~ O N C U"O L V o ? a) U ~ ca c 0 -c -c m U) O co V s 7 fn fa 7 C C E N C d = lJl L O N m m O p O? N E U a .a Q.p ° N Qa> o 'a c ca is N •O Z U) ca c to cc _ O O c~ O w d m o ° A W LL U) c`a m a o O L O O % O c CL - CL o a c C7 a-.- • O a> 0 ~ O L! t O s t p~° a) O O Z (j p 0 U) E cc 0 O j U) -c O 0 C U) -c 0 E -o d U CL - V Z N O a) N - -0 E U) co cu a) ~ N O O" _ E -a d -0 co 0) ~ v LJ 1- O co) co V ir- =3 U) > p a) 0 0 C ,a) O U O° a: U O V v > C L s Q'~ N j Q Q O C 0 (D C N O 0 N c a) c 0 .a 0 m 0 0 L O C C~ Vic'- E° NE L ~.U~C.) saa) co E -0 c co m c 0 c~E.`()° H c°n(D 0 .0 rr a) O Q _V Q c > O C OL Q Q C V C` 0> ~~d (a a) ca Ca t 0LLp~LL >i (D N A A N m 0 A A m A O co W Z ATTACHMENT# Z TOREPORT# CAD ~Z`~ - E of 0 r a m > P 4) .0 a, o d .a a L ` Z 0 c Q. U- CL W O p 0 0 U. d~ ~ 70 c 3 U) V >+w r* 0 U) 0 CL Im 20 O O O N O 'p Y CL O c C L G) O L- a. ~ ~ U. o~ 0 W H a o O ~ y W N L. 0 ~ d 3 • 0 c Y N O o U c~ cn a cu o ¢ U -C Y = c N E C L V N o c (6 •C d = ' O N CU 0 It E a c U m o Y 70 (D IL ca C3) 4) L- 0 C: m m a = W ° E.cu . in2 Am Z Q a~U a>r w L d j 'cu O c N o c~ co _ U Y f - O j V C ~ ~ ~ ~ U C U) N O C•- ~-M N U- -0 a DA mac: A 0 O w z W r ATTACHMENT# L- TO REPORT# -I1 i of N N - 65 tm _ cm O O^. e3 S N CD r G1 a N L ~ L L m CL Z tm M N W L U d N> 'a LL N N L. O N 4) 0 N om; c L v E= E ca as•W ~U-c co L m .~Em_~ dE~, O >a0 COL LOOaL ~0 ea a cmMCL ~ o 0 0 IW- °0 00 °o ~ Wi c Go Q ~A d4 Ei~ W L d 0 O C -c E 4) o 'O V N U C O L Na y 0C ~Q E Ad (D O N cLC U C L V N (0 0. F-• d N U C C N U V N O 6.2 Q co V U ~O to C L V t w N C L C c 4) L- m =3 cn CW O c E t~5c°~~YC N lz w v ~ C'c mc•cv H U G, L c co o.0 - c z 'L 0 N N C m m ca w 0 1- N Z U- c N O C` w d'L W L 0) r- a) (D Eo~a)(1) W CL c L) r w _ O O O O N :3 E L) 7 E U w Z r-+ N L L .F U O U O c 0 a O Z ea O c- O U c d = Q m N 0) C O c: N O-0 2 E Z = F- N C •F- U C N C: LE v T E W .0 0 W W ~ C D V O co Z Z m U (D CQ W V 0~ U o tp C CL CoOaci W O Z C O(D cu a) Q p .O a U. mco Ca)moga- c 4. .02 0 (D 4) E -0 cu co C .5; a) w .2 Q- O O a. U O N O J CU ~a- aa~ a m = ~ 2 LPL 0~ mAA ti O C = Z ATTAGHMENT# -3 TO REPORT#0-86 Ia-1I 166 y CL G1 y f0.. N y E'm0 oy co CL r- CD _ tmm ~H W w L. 0 Z N! G1 C Y CL W r d 0 ± V U. r, LL 4) 0 4) HD C Occ~ O OL O U) 0 a L C y r 0~ p L O a d .O y y- C. C C Q. O '3 O C O d d 0 0 0> O% d Q. ~ vHQ V O cv D w Q ° ° CD o g~ c 0 C) r- N N O W V ~ L d 3 m N E N O O rn m ca M C > c > ea u~3 m c ¢ > m o ° N V c L O Y d Q C 7 L. N y IL d rn c _ E L= to cm ° Co o O d O t 0 C 0-0 E: 4) 4) v E V y O N v O 0 _Ile C t0 O U d ° O m t ~.co w 3 a~ co a) c co C I.. N O' 0 a of L) m o i cn o 0 W Z Z o s L W w L. a) O ° o Q 7U c c~ 3 W = U ° c°o 70 +I w c v ° cu Z Z co) o C m Eo Z Z ca°i E E d Y° Q M -a w m o 0 E: z m W cm m ° ° ca -0 d V rn d R Ta ~ o L ° c 0 0) V o f o -a c~a v L- a) w c o m ° o~. Li~ o3E >O 0 ° o 0a ~L~'m acs Oa) 0f ~ U) a) F-- co ~ _d y 0 a) d s co) c: CL a0) 4) A MA A ea ° ° ? >2 DA MA Z ATTACHMENT#-. TO REPORT#~ 167 N 0) Q E r 0 L (V d N d t V_ as v d d O •O 4) Im 0LN4LL L d L y N d 'COL r- O 1 _ U. CL E 'o t; r- Er CL 0 = -0 Cc O N 0 i O N ~GU 1W C CU cm p r- O N d O L O_ .z 0 02 E a O~ m teN.a a: Q a L O • d '0 ca Z O d r'' 'L O Q. O J CL ~ c _5 c 5 o co i 0 W N Q CD O C O t0 w o W U L d4 O 3 d cn m a~ cn ° W - ° ° o 0 co 3 > - E C Q co EE a) a O t (D _ co N v ° ° to Y d c O - co to of 0 LL > 4) U) -a Q a~~ c La c c ° c c -c cc 0 E 4) 0= O S a > Q E io d ii CO CO O v' ; U - N c o ~ 0 •L - U d f W to a) ' E a) 13 ~ C O w 3: c c LZ m V 0 V Q m . C 0) c 'D cu L it 0 U 'a a) co c ° L- LL p ° t a- E co co io cn cn N v (D eo ~ c N C ~ ~ a) a) ~ c (n c _0 a) O d W W a o..0 a v° Q o c`a a~ t ui E - cn co c - as m Q- O 0 Q w+ 70 co N~ N~ 'a 0 cu N Q o L_ cn co E ° co) c 70 0 O co E m 0 a) cu 0 U ~ a) O E c W j E 0 4) c CO) a) a) co N O 0 O Cffi U d. O U N O c c c _ to c > N ~ c~ E C~ O Q } o fo -a w co m 3c 3c co tcnc = 0) cn O r cn > N° d c a) a~ o`.~ E °m o 00 Q`nrniiNm L~ rn U. c m 0 a) V) 4) m 0 '44) N~ fn c Q. N c- H_E 0A MA A >2! CA mA 0 n 00 ATTACHMENT# 3 TOREPORT# 040 oZ-1 6 8 N M d r H W O O O < 2 o N o WO L. _A w O_ 00 IL •L o O . 3 ~ mQ- ~ a L. W G W O F- O O Q Q O C O ~ O O O CO) La co O O)o 04 W 0 669 69. co L 3 m o c~ ca : a m a~ 4) t c co E w. _ .r E o N ' a ca c v) Lm o -0 °O mac' 2 co b c E La Ew Q c o- c of r CD 0 N C (6 N d a) N N _ U 2. 2: 4) -0 O W C J N d L cn ca U W O i :aR a UU IL L N C c C O L- OL i5 O N a) MW a~ m vQ -0 rn - O Z O L W Q cu N O Q. L ~.N V O 4) E 0 -c (D 7 O j v Z U a> m m 7 Z W C O 0 V .a O a) m W t m 2 cu N c m 'a t/~ Q m O cu a C W W -0 a L W V t = y _N cu > p z E c co a1! Q 3= E~ -a w E m cu _ 'O t C ch cc)-6 > cu 0 0-0 (L cn cu E W O N a ca co :3 E^ a) ca c O m ~-c co 0 E N U. A- N o ~ Q N O 2 3 5 _ E a) L O _ .r A C U E F- r+ Q. p Co V a) a) L) jX D_ 'Co N a s m E w 54) U) cH >5 D A m A CO) ~ J D A A m A Z ~ ~ ATTACHMENT #-.-L- TORE PORT # ,2-11 of . c c 69 N O N1 N ~ z w O O LL CL CL Q Q~ 3o 0o c~nv a ~,w ~w Hp O ca p oa a` oo 4) CL CL m IL` W J IL` W o I w o 0 Q c c c Qo CD 0 U) w H co de W N W U ~ 6 m 4) cu c: N a) D) 2 M o c cu 3 D aci c: C - T- 0 c ca E CL m.c scm to o 0 00 co to V ~c cE -ao ON o> C O U o La o a)> a wa E U) U - 4- c cn co a? .c c o~ o co L 0 -c ~E v ~E aU V 33 _ W O V ' N co L. g co V d O M E cc o N Q Opp U U co cu L- 0 m co .c L w E O c0 co U U al - d d ~i 'o •A U I-- N O N `O tB U O d K w o ~-c (L o N 3+~+ t O L Op V L. o cam' c co U) Z c a N N cLo a Q s a -c 70 LQ c o c o O t ~ N co: 2 O Q "0 o c Z 3 'C ~ 3 c N Q- :r O > co w a E m U o a~ W O c cM > .a O Q- L C 0 !E 0 cu ca E c O v O Q co w :3 Q.c N c0 "O _A O N o= O =3 C =3 3 U V 'm U U) O O U) "O c y •O O C~ 5 c co 3: E CL CU d F- O:3 .r N N E = O c : co (D E U O O U (1) -c O V N c6 O ~ o c~-.~- r~+ cnH cH c.~ m 4) a) aw OA A COOA Z OA MA A N I I 6 W) Z i ATTACHMENT# .3 TO REPORT#QAQ Q-4I 1 ~ . V d Lo N _ •i d Q •L a H H v V c w E- .0 c 3 '4) U. co L= ' co _ a •L 0Z r o oz o aiv a a E o~ cN E 02 ~N w'' *0 0 IL c m c ~•3 w ~•3 w.=_ 0 w H a C o g o o wv c ~ ~ L d G1 0 O O U) m 0 -0-0 0 Co O ~ 78 L 78 d ~c O O d -c O O (m4 r C = C N 0 -c r r+ 3 J O ~j ~ t- ` d O U t N E (Q L N O ~C U U •X p V ' (n O C O 0 0 ~ O O m i+ E a c U a c U W = O co N = 0 0 O O V N O 0-0 L N O O o= O C o o+ C O `p C (0 ++t a ~E U(D :3 O (n = C ~ Z U C ;N M W O m O V ~-0 Mv, L w co C 2 ~ c o4w V Z -c° ~°io hi CIL s Z W = 0) O C = ) a O C a m m 2° °O- a) °o = W r ~O -c N a r o Z V c -O O (D _0 = 70 o -0 W Z C M v° (a a N"_~'' N R te O X C ' Z -O i C E O W ao(o ~p Q cax-0 L O O ° m p 70 O N a O C -a J O M a W C V = O N = 3= O C C N M O C N cQ C'~ C M L (7 a+ O .O O O L O , d O (U O L- 0 p L c a c`a c~ 0-0 ` ~ Q'~-g 0-0 J O 1 C _Q L N` o ~ a L O W D A m A 4)~ 0A op0 A o ~ N Z w j ATTACHMENT# 3 TOREPORT# 1~-1J of ~g_ 171 N ~ d B H ~ Z W LL ~ LL FQ- O co 0 W C) ~ O Q C H cp C W 0 L6 3 as c Ad d _ 'o L L a a d o = O t a N C LLB Z t w y ~ O v w z 2 = W Z V W Z Q 2 Z W Ix W 2 F- O J Q H O H C Z i i I.ITT Uf Q.dl ry~t ~It I~It~11~11~11 ~ A o 2 O S,L { 0 JAM uTONa Roao A n O A ~O A 0 p o 0 JIM ROSEBANR AD Us" .~y ROBEBANR ry 7~ 00 ° o z O OOp o A WHITES ROAD t r ~ m FAIRRORT AD w O m T O ' Z DiwE OA a z o z a A o UVERRO L ROAD rJ 9o O O O 1 Op o H CORR O nLLINOS JD m~ BROCN OAD BR O 0 O LNR 4 111 11~11~ ~11~11 zm 5 ?max ® • 11`y11 z~z ~l~~1~ ~'~I~L ® = y m A TOWN OF 0,0z 00* r n Iv mzD IImIInt1nI1 1 . J 22 (!1 z < - lm Z r - x m m m m rn m m rn m m m z b W J O~ t/i A W N N ~ \0 DD J O\ V~ A W N m cn A ~ ~ ~ ~ A T cr m o m C v c n pal m m tO v J C Cn Q O O N N C Q T N m m V N l7 C7 Cn J w O SU @ N B) T N d d T 21 n CD 1p r ITI M d d N O B) N J O S B1 O o 0 0 CD c 3 7 0 0' c ° n n -i 1 0 ~ R 3 3 f r 3 0 °t m Cn d J r co m d ' m - IN v x_ m _ o n CID N d ~o ~ o m ° m J CD o r o 0 7 m °m 3 o o ° m W Cif w D a D n o N o O A n o D1 ° r cu 0 A aD a B. r ~ 7 W A m o d W o ' ° D § <p A n ? m a m d m m B°i R-U ~ ~n o m O 6 m 3 °m y, x m m m m o f. m A m 'o 3 3 3 y m 2L 0 ° d iD O m m m ? _ m n m m o fi cD n o w' n ° ' ? 3 ° d U Z7 3 O s o n N m m w d ' C fD O O Zl N 3 N W- 4 y C, 1 0 o (D J D ° a a J 3 - d o n tD d o: m a ~i m' r0" a m O N O O x j5 x N O F J (D (D 2 N d N 7 J t0 j5 , t Q a n S J y 'O W -0 o D, w N F3 3 o n ° n m a FN' co Nc6i ° mCD p n m c 1 m g o -1 0 _ D m D o f n o ID d <m x- m CD n m' o y o 3 y F m Cl _ F " m f cOOB an m C C O y m -9 n O D. n N y (D lC S S N O j y < JC W ma m o n^ n^ ? co 3 0 e► > > w ° N A ri 0 d Vl J o 3 0 o vm vm n m w m a a N ID o m n f ID o m m 3 n &:'T m ® n ® m n O m ur n y 40 v_ sE9 3 , -se J ~ ATTACFiMENT# 'S TO REPORT# C140 12_ I of N Draft Date: August 25, 2011 FUNDING AGREEMENT 173 FOR COMMUNITY ENHANCEMENTS IN THE CITY OF PICKERING THIS AGREEMENT is effective as of the date it has been executed by both Parties BETWEEN: THE REGIONAL MUNICIPALITY OF YORK (the "Region") -and- THE CORPORATION OF THE CITY OF PICKERING (the "City") WHEREAS: A. Pursuant to the Minutes of Settlement between the Parties dated July 28, 2010, for Ontario Superior Court of Justice Court File No. 63891/09, the Region reaffirmed its commitment to undertake or fund mutually agreed upon community enhancements with a total estimated value of approximately $8.0 million committed to as part of the Southeast Collector Trunk Sewer project (the "SEC"); B. The Parties have agreed upon the community enhancement projects that make up the community enhancement plan to be carried out by the City for which the Region will provide funds to the City. NOW THEREFORE, the Parties covenant and agree as follows: ARTICLE I INTERPRETATION Section 1.01: Definitions The terms defined herein shall have,. for all purposes of this Agreement, the following meanings, unless the context expressly or by necessary implication requires otherwise: (a) "Annual Report" has the meaning set out in Section 3.01:; (b) "Applicable Laws" means any applicable Canadian (whether federal, provincial, municipal or local) law, whether founded in statute, regulation, by-law, ordinance, rule, administrative interpretation, order (administrative, judicial or otherwise), writ, injunction, directive, judgment, decree, permit, approval, authorization or otherwise, in effect now or during the term of this Agreement, of any government, governmental authority, agency, board, tribunal, court, ministry, commission, department or official properly exercising its jurisdiction; (c) "Community. Enhancement Projects" means the individual projects within the community enhancement plan to be undertaken and completed by the City under this Agreement. 3177845 ATTACHMENT TOREPORT#('AO 12-11 174 -2- 9_ of (d) "Community Enhancement Plan" means the accumulation of all community enhancement projects with a total value of $8.0 million, as set out in Schedule "B" hereto. (e) "Community Enhancement Plan Completion Report" has the meaning set out in Section 3.03; (f) "Funding Schedule" means the estimated expenditure forecast for the community enhancement projects as set out in Schedule "C" hereto; (g) "Funds" means the monies to be paid by the Region to the City in accordance with the Funding Schedule; (h) "Litigation" includes court proceedings, tribunal proceedings, mediation; arbitration and judicial reviews; (i) "Party" or "Parties" means the Region, the City or both the'Region and the City as the case may be; 0) "Project Description" means a detailed description for each of the Community Enhancement Projects set out in Schedule "A" hereto, including scope, location and estimated cost; and; (k) "Semi Annual Request for Payment Report" has the meaning set out in Section 3.02. Section 1.02: Schedules The following Schedules attached hereto form a part of this Agreement: (a) Schedule "A" - Project Description (b) Schedule "B" - Community Enhancement Plan (c) Schedule "C" - Funding Schedule ARTICLE II PROJECT AND FUNDING Section 2.01: The City is to Complete the Community Enhancement Projects The City shall complete the Community Enhancement Projects to the specifications set out in Schedule "A" hereto and in accordance with the Community Enhancement Plan set out in Schedule "B" hereto. The City shall complete the Community Enhancement Plan by no later than December 31, 2017 notwithstanding Article 1(a) of the Minutes of Settlement that stipulates ATTACHMENT# 5 TOREPORT# /2-// -3- :3_ of. 175 York Region's commitment to undertake or fund the community enhancements over the period of 2011 to 2015. Section 2.02: Co mmencement of Community Enhancement Projects The City shall not commence any construction activity related to the Community Enhancement Projects until the Region has provided written authorization to the City to commence such construction activity. Section 2.03: Region to P rovide Funds The Region shall provide Funds to the City in accordance with the terms and conditions of this section to the maximum amount of $8.0 million as set out in the Funding Schedule (Schedule "C"), and in accordance with the Minutes of Settlement. Any payment of Funds by the Region to the City shall be contingent upon satisfaction of the following conditions: (a) the City has satisfactorily completed the required work in order to be eligible for the payment in accordance with the Project Description and Community Enhancement Plan; (b) the most recent Annual Report, Semi Annual Request for Payment Report or the Community Enhancement Plan Completion Report has been accepted by the Region; (c) the City has provided to the Region sufficient invoices and proof of payment; and (d) the City is in compliance with the terms and conditions of this Agreement. Section 2.04: Covenants of the City In performing its obligations under this Agreement, the City covenants and agrees with the Region that the City shall: (a) comply with any and all Applicable Laws; (b) only use the Funds for costs associated with the Community Enhancement Plan and for no other purpose; (c) not substantially deviate from the Project Description or the Community Enhancement Plan without the consent of the Region; (d) ensure that any materials, equipment or services the City may acquire with the Funds are acquired in conformance with the City's Purchasing Policy, with the exception of enhancement projects to be undertaken by TRCA, so as to ensure the best value for the Funds spent; TO REPORT#~1.2-1 S 16 7 _4_ ~TTF~CFi~iENT#- ___q_ of (e) provide the Region and its authorized agents with access to the Enhancement Project sites and any facilities used by the City or its contractors or subcontractors to perform the underlying work of the Community Enhancement Projects, including any deliverables, as well as any facilities and vehicles where any deliverable or work in progress is stored or otherwise located, any documents or drawings and any other Community Enhancement Project related books and records and other documents and materials, as deemed necessary by the Region to determine whether the City is in compliance with the terms and conditions of this Agreement. Any such site visit or inspection shall be conducted during normal business hours on no less than 24 hours prior written notice and in a manner that minimizes any disruptions to the City's business , (f) promptly notify the Region of any Litigation that may materially affect the Community Enhancement Projects or the ability of the City to carry out work on the Community Enhancement Projects or otherwise perform its obligations under this Agreement, and provide the Region with any documents upon request pertaining thereto; and (g) promptly notify the Region of any sale, lease, mortgage, lien, Litigation, order or other legal process or instrument that materially affects any, lands upon which the Community Enhancement Projects are to be built, any proprietary interest in such lands or the regulation of such lands or the uses that such lands may be put to, and to provide any documents pertaining thereto. ARTICLE III REPORTING Section 3.01: Annual Report The City shall prepare and submit to the Region an Annual Report by May 1 S` each year describing the work carried out in relation to the Community Enhancement Plan in the preceding calendar year (unless at the end of that year the Community Enhancement Projects have been completed), and shall include a detailed description of each of the following: (a) the work completed or undertaken on each Community Enhancement Project; (b) any known variances from the Project Description, Community Enhancement Plan or Funding Schedule, including explanations of the variances; (c) an updated Funding Schedule; (d) reasonably foreseeable challenges or circumstances that are likely to delay or increase the anticipated costs of the Community Enhancement Projects, and any recommendations for amending either the Project Description, Community Enhancement Plan or Funding Schedule in order to complete the Community Enhancement Plan in the most cost- effective and timely manner possible; and (e) any environmental issues encountered, including the results of any environmental assessment, sampling and/or monitoring. ATTACHMENT#-_ TOREPORT#046 12-11 - 5 - r of -L 7 The City shall submit supporting documentation for each of the above with each Annual Report. Section 3.02: . Semi Annual Request for Payment Report The City shall prepare and submit to the Region a Semi Annual Request for Payment Report which shall include the following information: (a) the work completed or undertaken on each Community Enhancement Project; (b) a financial summary of all expenditures by the City, with a breakdown of labour, material and equipment costs (where practical), and supporting paid invoices and receipts; (c) the estimated cost to complete the Community Enhancement Projects; and (d) an invoice covering expenditures incurred since the previous Semi Annual Request for Payment Report. The City shall submit supporting documentation for each of the above with each Semi Annual Request for Payment Report and the Region shall reimburse the City for costs incurred in accordance with Section 3.04. Section 3.03: Community Enhancement Plan Completion Report Within 90 days of the soonest of (1) completion of the Community Enhancement Projects within the Community Enhancement Plan or; (2) the exhaustion of Funds, the City shall prepare and submit to the Region a Community Enhancement Plan Completion Report which shall include: (a) all the information and supporting documentation required in an Annual Report, to the extent applicable; (b) a final request for payment for expenditures incurred since the last Semi Annual Request for Payment Report; (c) certification by the City that as of the date of the Project Completion Report: (i) the Enhancement Projects have been completed in accordance with the Project Description and the Community Enhancement Plan; (ii) the representations and warranties set out in Section 4.01: are true; and (iii) the City is not in breach of any of the covenants contained in Section 2.04. Section. 3.04: Review and Acceptance of Reports by Region The Region shall be entitled to review, assess and accept or not accept any Annual Report, Semi Annual Request for Payment Report or Community Enhancements Plan Completion Report (in this section, a "Report") submitted to the Region in accordance with this section. rTII &iMENT# - 1pREPORT# 17~ -6- of _14 In the event of a requirement for the Region to assess a Report, such as an audit requirement, the Region has the right to inspect or retain a third party to inspect, at the Region's cost, any aspect of the Community Enhancement Plan that the City has the power or ability to make available for inspection, including: (a) any documents related to the- Community Enhancement Projects, including invoices, purchase orders, receipts, books, meeting agendas and minutes, plans, drawings, reports and notes; (b) Community Enhancement Projects sites and facilities thereon; and (c) any materials, equipment and vehicles related to the Community Enhancement Projects and the facilities used for their production, storage, or disposal. Within 15 days of submission of a Report, the Region shall notify the City whether the Report has been accepted or requires revision. If the Region fails to deliver such notice' in writing within 15 days of submission of a Report, the Report shall be deemed to be accepted by the Region. The Region shall be entitled to not accept a Report if the Report is deficient in meeting the criteria set out in this Agreement. If the Region does not accept a Report submitted by the City, the Region will advise what revisions or additional information is required, and the City shall revise and re-submit the Report for acceptance by the Region. Within 30 days of acceptance of a Report requiring payment, the Region will forward payment to the City. ARTICLE IV REPRESENTATIONS, WARRANTEES, INDEMNIFICATION AND INSURANCE Section 4.01: Representations and Warranties of the City The City represents and warrants that, as of the Effective Date: (a) the City is a body corporate, duly organized and validly existing under the laws of Ontario and has full authority and jurisdiction to enter into this Agreement and to perform the obligations hereunder without the need for any further authorization or approval (whether internal or external to the City); and (b) The performance of this Agreement by the City does not infringe any third party rights, including, without limitation, any intellectual property rights, any trade secrets or any other proprietary rights. -7- ATTACH MErNT#__5__ TO REPORT of 179 Section 4.02: Indemnification by the City The City agrees to indemnify and hold harmless the Region, its chair, regional councillors, officers, employees, agents or insurers (individually or collectively, the "Indemnified Parties") from and against any and all actions, claims, demands, costs, damages, suits, proceedings, expenses, liabilities or damages which the Indemnified Parties may incur or suffer in connection with or arising out of any act or omission of the City, its mayor and councillors, officers, employees, agents, subcontractors or any other person for whom the City is responsible at law in respect of any matter related to the Community Enhancement Plan or this.Agreement. Section 4.03: Insurance Without restricting the generality of the indemnification herein; the City shall obtain and maintain and provide evidence to the Region of the following'nsurance coverage obtained from insurance companies licensed to transact business in the Province of Ontario and not otherwise prohibited from use by the Region's Insurance and Risk Manager. (a) Commercial General Liability Commercial General Liability insurance with the Region listed as an3Additional Insured, with limits of not less than $5 million inclusive per occurrence for bodily and personal injury, death and damage to property including loss of use hereof. Ifthe policy contains a General Aggregate, the minimum acceptable aggregate is $10 million for the General Aggregate. The Commercial General Liability (CGL) insurance must include Cross Liability & Severability of Interest Clauses, XCU exclusion deleted, Products & Completed Operations coverage, and Standard Non-Owned Automobile endorsement including standard contractual liability coverage. The Region may accept in place of the above mentioned insurance coverage primary CGL insurance with limits of $1 million or $2 million inclusive per occurrence and $4 million or $3 million in Excess Liability or Umbrella Liability insurance with aggregates for each policy to provide the minimum coverages and limits as noted above. (b) Automobile Liability Automobile Liability insurance in respect of licensed vehicles with limits of not less than $2 million inclusive per occurrence for bodily injury, death and damage to property that is a Standard owner's form automobile policy providing third party liability and accident benefits insurance and covering licensed owned and leased vehicles operated by or on behalf of the City. (c) Environmental Impairment Environmental Impairment insurance with limits of not less than $2 million per claim. ATTACHMENT TO REPORT# 14- 180 -8- of~ The forms of the above insurance policies shall in all respects be satisfactory to the Region's Insurance and Risk Manager and shall be maintained continuously from the sooner of either the commencement of work on the Community Enhancement Projects or the Effective Date of this Agreement, and be maintained until the Agreement has been completed to the satisfaction of the Region or terminated. The policies shall be endorsed to provide the Region with not less than 30 days written notice in advance of any cancellation, change or amendment which restricts coverage such that the requirements in the Agreement are no longer met. The City shall describe the above Insurance that it carries in the Region's standard "Certificate of Insurance" form. Section 4.04: Workplace Safety & Insurance Board (WSIB) The City must be in good standing with the Workplace Safety and Insurance Board and shall furnish the Region with satisfactory evidence, inAhe form of a valid WSIB Letter of Good Standing, prior to commencement of the work under this'Agreementand, upon presentation of a final invoice and final report and at any other time during the Agreement at the Region's request. The City shall maintain its WSIB Insurance or pay such assessments as will protect the City and the Region from claims under the Workplace Safety and Insurance Act, 1997, S.O. 1997, c.16, and from any other claims for damage from personal injury, including death, and from claims for property damage which may arise from the City's operations under this Agreement. If the City does not or is not able to provide Workplace Safety and Insurance Board Letters of Good Standing, the City shall furnish to the Region Employers Liability insurance in the amount of $2 million. Evidence of this coverage shall be on the Region's standard "Certificate of Insurance" form. ARTICLE V TERM Section 5.01: Term (a) This Agreement shall remain in force and be binding upon the Parties until completion and acceptance of the Community Enhancement Plan Completion Report, and receipt by the City of the final payment by the Region. ARTICLE VI GENERAL Section 6.01: Notices All notices and other correspondence under this Agreement shall be delivered personally, by mail or by e-mail to the following addresses: i -9- ATTACH MENTts r 5 TO REPORT#E O 0-1 ~ Gof.~ 18( (i) if to the Region: The Regional Municipality of York Environmental Services Department 17250 Yonge Street Newmarket, ON L3Y 6Z1 Attention: Mr. Wayne Green E-mail: Wayne.Greengyork.ca (ii) if to the City: The Corporation of the City of Pickering One The Esplanade Pickering, ON L IV 6K7 Attention: Mr. Richard Holborn E-mail: rholborn@cityofpickering.com The Parties may change their respective representative or addresses for giving notice (whether for any particular class of notice or for all notices) by giving ten days notice the other Party of the new representative or address. Any notice delivered personally shall be deemed to be received on the date of delivery. Any notice sent by e-mail shall be deemed to be received the next business day after the date of being sent. Any notice sent by mail shall be deemed to be given on the 5cn business day after being sent. Section 6.02: Assignment The City may not assign this Agreement or any rights or obligations hereunder (including any part of the Funds) without the prior written consent of the Region. Section 6.03: Headings The headings herein are for reference only and do not affect the interpretation of the Agreement. Section 6.04: Applicable Law This Agreement shall be construed and enforced in accordance with the laws of the Province of Ontario and the laws of Canada applicable therein and shall be treated in all respects as an Ontario contract. 1 8 2 _10- Ai"TACHMENT#s_5__ TOREPORT# /d of Section 6.05: Severability If any part of this Agreement is found to invalid or unenforceable by a court of law the remainder of this Agreement shall not be affected thereby. Section 6.06: A mendment Unless specifically provided otherwise herein, any amendment, modification or waiver to this Agreement shall be in writing and signed by both Parties. Section 6.07: Successors and Assigns This Agreement shall enure to the benefit of, be enforceable by and binding upon the Parties' respective successors and permitted assigns. Section 6.08: Non -Waiver No consent to or waiver of any breach or default by any Party in the performance of its obligations hereunder shall be deemed or construed to be a consent to or a waiver of any other breach or default in the performance by such. Party of the same or any other obligations of such Party hereunder. Failure on the part of any Party to complain of any act or failure to act of any other Party or to declare any other Party in default, irrespective of how long such failure continues, shall not constitute a: waiver by such Party of its rights hereunder. Section 6.09: Relationshipof Parties Nothing in this Agreement shall be construed so as to create an agency, joint venture, partnership or franchise relationship between the Parties, and neither Party has the authority to bind the other. Section 6.10: Further Acts The Parties agree, from time to time hereafter and upon any reasonable request of the other Party, to do or cause to be done all such further acts, deeds or things as may be required to more effectually implement the true intent of this Agreement. IN WITNESS WHEREOF the Parties hereto have duly executed this Agreement by their authorized representatives. ATTACHMENT# ITO REPORT#C40 Q-// -11- of 1 83 THE REGIONAL MUNICIPALITY OF YORK Per: Date Name: Erin Mahoney Title: Commissioner - Environmental Services THE CORPORATION OF THE CITY OF PICKERING Per: Date Name: Dave Ryan Title: Mayor Date Per Name: Debbie/Shields Title: City Clerk 6 1 ATTACH MENT# 5 _ TOREPORT# CAA) 19--l 184 of SCHEDULE "A" PROJECT DESCRIPTION [To be_inserted] 3177845 r 9t f I . C . 4-5- TO REPORT#-0,4n 18.5 . of SCHEDULE "B" COMMUNITY ENHANCEMENT PLAN [To be_inserted] r 3177845 ATTACH MENT#._.-~_ iC~REPORT# ' 186 SCHEDULE "C" FUNDING SCHEDULE [To be inserted] i 3177845 Cif Report To Executive Committee PICKERING Report Number: CAO 13-11 Date: September 12, 2011 187 From: Debbie Shields City Clerk Subject: Animal Sheltering Services - File: S3010-007-11 i Recommendation: 1. That Report CAO 13-11 be received; 2. That the current lease and servicing agreement with The Dog Pad Inc. which expires on December 31, 2011, located at 15 Reesor Road not be renewed. 3. That Council provide pre 2012 Capital Budget approval for the following: a) that the Mayor and Clerk be authorized to enter into a 5 year lease, in a form acceptable to the Chief Administrative Officer, the Director of Corporate Services & Treasurer and the City Solicitor, with Transport Canada for the property located at 1688 Highway No..7; and b) leasehold improvements, furniture and fixtures in the estimated amount of $100,000. 4. That Council authorize the Director, Corporate Services &.Treasurer to finance the project as follows: a) the estimated project cost for leasehold improvements, furniture, fixtures, and equipment through an internal loan not to exceed $100,000 at a term not to exceed five years; b) the internal loan be undertaken from the Development Charges Reserve Funds at a rate of 2.5%; c) the loan be repaid through an annual savings in lease and service costs allocated in the current budget for Animal Services in the estimated amount including financing cost of $21,500 annually until the loan is repaid; and d) the Treasurer be authorized to make any changes, adjustments, and revisions to the amount, term, and conditions or take any actions necessary in order to effect the foregoing; Report CAO 13-11 September 12, 2011 Subject: Animal Sheltering Services Page 2 5. That the appropriate officials of the City of Pickering be given the authority to give effect thereto. Executive Summary: Since 2007, the animal shelter has been based at a boarding kennel located at 15 Reesor Road in Toronto. Contract negotiations began earlier this year with the Dog Pad Inc., as the current contract is set to expire on December 31, 2011. On July 1, 2011, the City was advised that the Dog Pad Inc. was requesting a 50% increase in lease and service payments to extend the lease. Under the provisions of the current agreement, should the City not agree to the 50% increase, the Dog Pad Inc. has given the City notice to vacate the premises on or before December 31, 2011. A 50% increase would mean the annual lease and service cost of $54,000 would increase to $81,000 yearly for the use of their facility. The City recently became aware of the potential to lease property located at 1688 Highway No. 7 in Brougham, formerly known as Nonna's Cafe. Upon further investigation, it has been determined that this site would be an excellent opportunity for the City to run and operate its own animal shelter in Pickering. This site would suffice for the next five years however; the long term plan is to have a permanent animal shelter built in conjunction with a new Operations Centre. The market rate for the above property was listed at $1500 monthly (net), however Transport Canada have agreed to lower this to $1000 monthly (net) subsequent to discussions with senior staff. The operating costs for the City to run its own animal shelter will be covered under Animal Services current operating budget (account 2399) and are estimated to have a net savings of $30,000 yearly. Council approval is required to enter into the lease and fund leasehold improvements, furniture, and fixtures. All funds will be repaid out of the current budgeted expenditure account for animal services. Financial Implications: As the current arrangement with The Dog Pad Inc. ends on December 31, 2011, the recommendations require approval prior to Council considering the 2012 Budgets. The property at 1688 Highway No. 7 will require work to retrofit the facility to meet our animal sheltering needs. In order to ensure the new facility is ready to shelter animals by January 1, 2012, the necessary work must begin immediately. The chart below compares yearly operating costs based on our current contract, proposed contract and to operate a city run facility. CORP0227-07/01 revised Report CAO 13-11 September 12, 2011 Subject: Animal Sheltering Services Page 3 109 Current Cost Proposed Cost at City Run Facility Cost at at the Dog the Dog Pad Brougham Site Pad Lease Costs 2,000/month 3,000/month $1,000/month (negotiated down from $1500) Service Costs $2,500/month $3750/month $0- included in current (includes staff and salaries maintenance Utilities Included with n/a Hydro: $5,000 lease costs Oil: $4,000 Water: $600 Contin enc n/a n/a $2,400 Total Yearly Costs $54,000 $81,000 $24,000 While the exact nature and cost of leasehold improvements, furniture, fixtures and equipment is to be determined, it is felt that a provision of $100,000 should be sufficient. This expenditure will be financed by an internal loan to be repaid with the annual savings in lease costs over the next five years. Staff's best estimates do not indicate an increase in budget for this facility and operation. As previously indicated, by operating our own animal shelter the City will be saving $30,000 annually over the current cost. Based on the proposed contract put forward by The Dog Pad Inc., the City would have a cost saving of $57,000 over the renewal lease cost. Sustainability Implications: We are committed to financial integrity, accountability and fiscal sustainability. This new lease arrangement will bring all shelter management directly under the city's control as well as being more cost efficient and saving money. The hamlet of Brougham is only 10km away from the core of the City and is more accessible than our current facility, located in Scarborough. Having a facility located in Pickering will ultimately reduce the distance of travel that staff are required to drive, therefore, reducing the amount of gas emissions entering into the environment. Operating our own facility will allow us to expand our community engagement initiatives, and further develop education and volunteer opportunities. i CORP0227-07/01 revised Report CAO 13-11 September 12, 2011 Subject: Animal Sheltering Services Page 4 Background: The City assumed the responsibility of Animal Services on January 1, 2006 upon termination of a long term agreement with the Town of Whitby. Since that time, all functions of Animal Services are handled in-house with the exception of shelter services. On May 14, 2007, Resolution 100/07 for Report CS 19-07 was passed by Council recommending that the City enter into a public-private agreement with Country Boarding and Training Kennels located in Toronto for a five year term. The agreement stated that Country Kennels would provide the feed, care and housing for all Pickering Animals, while City staff would be responsible to staff the facility each evening, for residents to reclaim or adopt animals. This agreement started in July of 2007. In October of 2009, Country Kennels was sold and purchased by a new owner called The Dog Pad Inc. The current agreement states that the Dog Pad Inc. will provide care and housing for all Pickering Animals, while City staff are still responsible to staff the . facility each evening for residents to reclaim or adopt animals. In addition, the City is now responsible for providing all food and litter required for our animals. This public-private agreement was put into place while the City reviewed a long term plan to build an animal shelter in conjunction with a new Operations Centre. The current agreement has allowed staff to better understand the day to day operations of an animal shelter. Although this agreement has worked for the past 5 years, staff feel that at this time in order to provide the most cost efficient and the highest quality of service to our residents, we must have direct control of all aspects of our animal shelter service. Short Term Sheltering Plan Staff are recommending that the City enter into a 5 year lease with Transport Canada to lease the property located at 1688 Highway No. 7 in Brougham, formerly known as Nonna's Cafe. Further to the financial cost savings, staff have identified many other advantages associated with the City operating its own animal shelter. Advantages of taking full ownership of animal sheltering include the following; • shelter is in Pickering • immediate accountability as the service provider, and the ability to address problems immediately • increase consistency with standards of Animal Care • increase consistency with cleaning practices and care given to animals • potential to increase sense of pride by City Staff and residents • potential to increase community engagement • free up office space at City Hall CORP0227-07/01 revised Report CAO 13-11 September'12, 2011 Subject: Animal Sheltering Services Page 5 191 In order to fulfill legislative requirements, certain leasehold improvements will have to be undertaken. Jurecka & Associates has been hired to conduct a preliminary assessment of the property and to determine what leasehold improvements are necessary. The chart below identifies the one-time leasehold improvements that will be required in order to retrofit the building to meet legislative requirements to operate an animal shelter. Infrastructure upgrades • insulating and treating the exterior walls and ceilings (including air & vapour barrier and interior finish) • extension of HVAC conduits and venting throughout facility • additional lighting where existing is insufficient • additional electrical distribution where insufficient • water supply with floor drains to rear east room • paint throughout Site modifications to meet accessibility • install concrete ramp, handrails, requirements landing & steps to front entrance of (longer-term) building • retrofit washroom to meet legislative requirements Other Site modifications . fence surrounding perimeter of property • Install security system Furniture & Fixtures, and Equipment . washer/dryer These items are a one-time capital cost and will be re-located to another facility when the • portable dog runs time comes. • cat cages • power washer CORP0227-07/01 revised ,Report CAO 13-11 September 12, 2011 Subject: Animal Sheltering Services Page 6 192 Animal Housing Requirements Housing is being recommended for approximately 35 cats, and an additional capacity for 4 cats in quarantine and 4 cats in isolation facilities Housing for 10 dogs is being recommended including an.area to quarantine for rabies observation and/or isolation due to disease. Sheltering and Administrative Staff Requirements The Supervisor of Animal Services will oversee the day to day operation of the shelter and field staff and assist Officers in all areas when needed. All animal services staff would work out of the facility and would assist in the day to day sheltering activities. The current 2012 staffing complement for Animal Services will be able to successfully run the animal shelter. Staffing requirements will be reviewed on an annual basis and depending on service needs; future staffing will be budgeted accordingly. Operating our own animal shelter will give us the opportunity to further develop our volunteer program and have an opportunity to further engage with our community. Currently, our volunteer program consists of 35 registered volunteers. Unfortunately, without our own facility our volunteers are only able to assist us at our satellite adoption facility at PetSmart, limiting the numbers of volunteers required. Operating our own animal shelter will allow us to expand our volunteer program into the shelter. .Long Term Sheltering Plan The City of Pickering is currently undertaking an Environmental Assessment to determine an appropriate location to build a new Operations Centre. As part of that assessment, the consultants have been asked to evaluate the potential to have an Animal Shelter located on the same site. The long term plan of Animal Services is to have an animal shelter built on the same site as the Operations Centre. Depending on the location and size of land allocated for the animal shelter, we will investigate the potential to partner with another municipality or a local veterinarian. Summary Based on the information provided in this report, it is recommended that the City proceed to enter into a 5-year lease with Transport Canada to operate our own animal sheltering facility. Attachments: none CORP0227-07/01 revised Report CAO 13-11 September 12, 2011 Subject: Animal Sheltering Services Page 7 193 Prepared By: Approved/Endorsed By: 6AIam Q W i2s J Lindsey Narraway Debbie Shields Supervisor, Animal S rvices City Clerk Gil Paterson Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer Copy: Chief Administrative Officer Recommended for the consideration of Pickering Cit Counci ) Am - Z4,2-011 Tony Prevedel, P.Eng. Chief Administrative Officer CORP0227-07/01 revised