Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutOES 04-11 cry o~ Report To Executive Committee PICKERING Report Number: OES 04-11 Date: January 10, 2011 250 From: Everett Buntsma Director, Operations & Emergency Services Subject: Tender for Roof Reinforcement at East Shore Community Centre - Tender No. T-25-2010 - File: A-1440-001-11 Recommendation: 1. That Report OES 04-11 of the Director, Operations & Emergency Services regarding Roof Reinforcement at East Shore Community Centre be received; 2. That Tender T-25-2010 submitted by Lisgar Construction Company at a cost of $149,160 (HST included) be accepted; 3. That the total gross project cost of $170,630 (HST included) and a net project cost of $153,658 including the tender amount and other associated costs be approved as a 2011 project in advance of the presentation and approval of the 2011 Capital Budget; 4. That Council authorizes the Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer to finance the project as follows: a) That the sum of $150,000 to be financed by the issue of debentures by The Regional Municipality of Durham over a period not to exceed ten (10) years; b) That the sum of $3,658 to be funded from Current Funds; c) That the annual repayment charges from the debenture in the amount of approximately $20,000 be included in the annual Current Budget for the City of Pickering commencing in 2011, continuing thereafter until the debenture is repaid, and any financing cost be paid out of the Current Budget; d) The Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer has certified that this loan and the repayment thereof falls within the City's debt and financial obligations approved annual repayment limit for debt and other financial obligations for 2010 as approved by the Province for municipalities in Ontario and therefore the Ontario Municipal Board approval is not required; Report OES 04-11 January 10, 2011 Subject: Roof Reinforcement at East Shore Community Centre 251 Tender No. T-25-2010 Page 2 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; 5. That the draft bylaw 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 roof rehabilitation was approved by Council in the 2010 Capital Budget for the East Shore Community Centre totaling $210,000. Tenders were received and this project was initiated in July 2010. During the roof rehabilitation it was discovered that Tectum deck panels in the north west corner of the building had numerous cuts through the top of the decking. There were saw cuts most likely caused during the removal of the previous roof some years prior at the facility. These cuts had permanently damaged and reduced the strength of the Tectum Panels The Tectum decking required replacement and the services of a professional structural engineer was engaged to advise on replacing the damaged panels. During his investigation it was determined that a large number of the other panels had sagged or possessed permanent deflections (see Site Inspection Report Egberts Engineering Limited). The panels are located over the gymnasium, community room, and lawn bowling room. The engineer had concerns for the snow loading capacity of the roof and felt that the original roof capacity would have been reduced by approximately 15%. It was the recommendation of the engineer that the roof be reinforced by adding steel sections (channels or angles) between the steel joists and to add additional wood purloins, to reduce the span of the decking.. The engineer was requested to prepare specifications and stamped drawings to proceed with an additional tendering process for roof reinforcement work. The roof reinforcement project resulted in a tender price $149,160 (including HST). CORP0227-07/01 revised Report OES 04-11 January 10, 2011 Subject: Roof Reinforcement at East Shore Community Centre Tender No. T-25-2010 Page 3 252 Financial Implications: While the actual roof replacement (Phase 1) was included in the 2010 Capital Budget, the need for rehabilitation of the deck was unforeseen. Given the nature of the repairs required, time is of the essence. It was not deemed advisable to postpone this project to March when the budgets are approved. Therefore the project is being put forth now as a 2011 Capital Budget item. This will provide for immediate commencement of the needed repairs before winter snow load conditions become a concern. This will also provide the base of the roof replacement for 2011. While the roof replacement qualified for 100 per cent funding from the Federal Gas Tax Grant, rehabilitation of an existing roof support system will not. Therefore this entire project must be debt financed. 1. TENDER AMOUNT T-25-2010 $132,000 HST (13%) 17,160 Sub-Total 149,160 HST Rebate (11.24%) (14,837) Total $134,323 2. SOURCE OF FUNDS Capital Budget Location Protect Code Source of Funds Budget Required T-25-2010 Roof 5999.1198.6999 Debt - 10 years $0 $150,000 Reinforcement Current Funds 3,658 Pre-Budget Approval Total Funding $153,658 CORP0227-07/01 revised Report OES 04-11 January 10, 2011 Subject: Roof Reinforcement at East Shore Community Centre 253 Tender No. T-25-2010 Page 4 3. ESTIMATED PROJECT COSTING SUMMARY T-25-2010 $132,000 Tender & Miscellaneous Costs 4,000 Construction Contingency 15,000 Total Project Costs $151,000 HST (13%) 19,630 Total Gross Project Cost $170,630 HST Rebate (11.24%) 1( 6,972) Total Net Project Cost $153,658 Project Cost under.(over) approved funds by ($153,658) The structural problems currently encountered have resulted in Health and Safety issues that need to be dealt with immediately and may not be able to await 2011 Capital Budget approval. Sustainability Implications: The existing roof decking requires reinforcement which will extend the useful lifespan of the roof for many years Background: Bids have been received in response to the tender call, which closed on Wednesday, December 1, 2010. There were two addenda issued on this project. An advertisement was placed in the Daily Commercial News and on the City's website inviting companies to download the tendering documents and drawings for the tender. A mandatory site visit was held on Tuesday November 23, 2010 and six (6) companies attended of which four bidders responded. The low bid was submitted by Lisgar Construction Company. This company's references have been checked and are deemed acceptable by the Director, Operations and Emergency Services. CORP0227-07/01 revised i Report OES 04-11 January 10, 2011 Subject: Roof Reinforcement at East Shore Community Centre 254 Tender No. T-25-2010 Page 5 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 Lisgar construction Company and have been reviewed by the Coordinator, Health & Safety and are deemed acceptable. The Certificate of Insuarance has been reviewed by the Manager, Taxation is deemed acceptable. In conjunction with staff's review of the contactor's previous work experience and bonding available on this project, the tender is deemed acceptable. Upon careful examination of all tenders and relevant documents received, the Facilities Operations Division recommends the acceptance of the low bid submitted by Lisgar Construction Company for Tender No. T-25-2010 in the amount of $149,160 (HST included) and that the total net project cost of $153,658 be approved. This report has been prepared in conjunction with the Manager, Supply & Services who. concurs with the foregoing. Attachments: 1. Supply & Services Memorandum dated December 2nd, 2010 2. Record of Tenders Opened and Checked 3. Site Inspection Report Egberts Engineering Limited 4. By-law to authorize the Roof Reinforcement at East Shore Community Centre in the City of Pickering and the issuance of debentures therefor in the amount of $150,000. Prepared By: Approved / Endorsed By: pupe w innell Everett Bunts rvisor, Facilities Operations Director, Operations & Emergency Services Caryn Kong, CGA Gillis a erson, CMA Senior Financial Analyst- Capital & Director, Corporate Services & Debt Management Treasurer CORP0227-07/01 revised Report OES 04-11 January 10, 2011 Subject: Roof Reinforcement at East Shore Community Centre 255 Tender No. T-25-2010 Page 6 Vera A. F Igemacher C.P.P., CPPO, CPPB, C.P.M., CMM III Manager, Supply & Services MD: and Copy: Chief Administrative Officer Recommended for the consideration of Pickerin ity Cou it 20,2010 Tony Preve el Chief Administrative Officer i i CORP0227-07/01 revised ATTACHMENT# TO REPORT#Q. 04 I of c= 256 o¢ Cif PICKERING memo. To: Everett Bunts ma December 2, 2010 Director, Operations & Emergency Services From: Vera A. Felgemacher Manager, Supply & Services Copy: Supervisor, Facilities Operations Subject: Tender No. T-25-2010 Tender for Roof Reinforcement at Eastshore Community Centre Closing Date: December 1, 2010 File: F-5400-01 Tenders have been received for the above project. An advertisement was placed in the Daily Commercial News and on the City's website inviting companies to download the tendering documents and drawings for the above mentioned tender. Two (2) addenda were issued on this project. A mandatory site visit was held on Tuesday, November 23, 2010 and six (6) bidders attended of which four.(4) bidders responded. A copy of the Record of Tenders Opened and Checked used at the public tender opening is attached. Tenders shall be irrevocable for 60 days after the official closing date and time. 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. SUMMARY Harmonized Sales Tax included Bidder Total Tendered Amount After Calculation Check Lisgar Construction Company $149,160.00 $149,160.00 Aplus General Contractors Corp. $219,220.00 . Automatic rejection - Bid does not acknowledge addenda Reference: Purchasing By-law No. 5900-01, Procedure No Joe Pace & Sons Contracting PUR 010-001, 10.04, Item 7-12; Information to Bidders Items Inc. 7(b), 22, 23, 24, 37, 39, Advertisement; City of Pickering Website, Supply & Services, General Information - General Instructions, Item 1; and City of Pickering Website, Current Bid Opportunities - Downloading Instructions. John McLellan Contracting Inc. No Bid ATTACHMENT4-1- TO REPORT 257 of Pursuant to Information to Bidders Item 26, the following will be requested of the selected bidder for your review during the evaluation stage of this tender call. Please advise when you wish us to proceed with this task. (a) A copy of the Health and Safety Policy to be used on this project; (b) A copy of the current Workplace Injury Summary Report issued by Workplace Safety & Insurance Board (in lieu of the Workplace Injury Summary Report document, a copy of the current CAD. 7, NEER, or MAP reports may be submitted); (c) A copy of the current Clearance Certificate issued by Workplace Safety & Insurance Board; (d) The City's certificate of insurance or approved alternative form shall be completed by the bidder's agent, broker or insurer; (e) list of Sub-Contractors in accordance with General Conditions Item 31; (f) Such further information, as the City. may request in writing. Include the following items in your Report to Council.- (a). if items (a) through (c) noted above, are acceptable to the Co-ordinator, Health & Safety, (b) if item (d) - Insurance - is acceptable to the Manager, Taxation; (c) any past work'experience with the low bidder - Lisgar Construction Company - including work location; (d) without past work experience, if reference information is acceptable; (e) .-the appropriate account number(s) to which this work is to be charged; (f) the budget amount(s) assigned thereto; (g) Treasurer's confirmation of funding; (h) related departmental approvals; (i) any reason(s) why the low bid is not acceptable; and (j) related comments specific to the project.. Egberts Engineering Limited as the consultants on this project will be reviewing submissions and making recommendations to you. The consultant should also review carefully all submittal information based on tendering instructions. If the consultant notices any infractions or information missing during the evaluation, please contact a member of Supply & Services as soon as possible. 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 ad ised of the outcome in due course. If y, u require further information, please feel free to contact me or a member of Supply & Se ices. VAF/jg Attachments December 2, 2010 Tender No. T-25-2010 Page 2 Tender for Roof Reinforcement at Eastshore Community Centre ATTACHMENT#~~ TO REPORT#OLS 0471 1 of L 258 D -0 C- n s to CD CD ID -~i r o : CCD W D m :3 m Q° a c o o 5 Z o m z 3' o ~ ~ ca m m -G -G -f < C a o m cn (n cn 0 y ~D Q a 74 CD In p N d p o rz,. W o Q Z] y o m ca a c 0 0 m o O mn co o z ~ 0 M o o. U) - COD- O a p o On _ N01 ~ To m <D z m 4A .69 ~ -69 -69 {69 ffl (A c. ~ m ~ CD z X3 T NT, o QD C S n W ID 0 = Q. °c ° n o O m. c n p ~ n , CD m X ° j ~ N ch Cl) M z z 0 m z N I ATTACH MENT# 3_Y._ 9-ORFPORT#L~,_0 / 259 _L_ of _0__ EGBERTS ENGINEERING LIMITED CONSULTING ENGINEERS 3311 13ayview Avenue, Suite 106, Willowdale, Ontario M2K 1C,4 Tel: (416)221-9969 Fax: (416)733-2198 SITE INSPECTION REPORT PROJECT: East Shore Community Centre, 910 Liverpool Road, Pickering DATE: July 5, 2010 PROJECT NO. 2010-100 REPORT NO.: 1 DISTRIBUTION: Soren Vaerum email vaerum@garlandeanada.com STATUS: 1. The rooting was being replaced at this site at numerous different roof elevations. The roof over the gymnasium is composed of Tectum acoustical decking placed over 36" deep long span steel joists. The Tectum was noted as sagged adjacent to the high roof to the west of the Gym and this area was left unroofed, while the remaining Tectum roof deck was re-roofed.. 2. The Tectum is 3" thick, unreinforced solid Tectum (ie no bonded insulation) based on a core made by Garland (we did not. see the core). The depth was obtained by measuring down alongside the deck, and not by a direct measure of a removed piece or against an exposed edge. COMMENTS: 1. There are two notably sagged or permanently deflected panels: one at the north west corner of the roof, where the rooting has not been replaced, and also one 18 ft south of the corner, immediately beside the high wall. The actual deflection was observed visually from the floor below, and an accurate measurement would require ladder or scaffold set-up below. However, when viewing the roof below, and using the steel bridging as a straight line guide to view Tectum joints, almost all Tectum panels are sagged. There is presently little weight on the root! 2. The Tectum panels in the exposed north west corner had a number of cuts through the top surfacer in both directions across the panel. These are minimum '/4" deep and may be deeper, and are spaced about 24 to 30" apart. They are likely saw-cuts made by previous re-roof work, where the roofing was saw-cut to enable removals of the old roof. These saw-cuts have permanently damaged and reduced the strength of the Tectum panels. Page 1 ATTACHMENT# 3 TO REPORT#66s 04 of 260 3. We have reviewed the average snow load required for this roof (25 pst), and the original likely design snow load of 32 psf (Pickering was not a listed municipality 50 years ago, so data for adjacent locations was likely used). We also reviewed manufacturer's current load recommendations for both 3" and 2.5" Tectum (likely equivalent depth of a damaged panel), with respect to the spans noted on site. The equivalent 2.5" (damaged) depth does not have a listed load at. h ft span and this is also the limit of the spans listed for this depth of Tectum, so any damage or deficiency would place the decking at the limit. ofuseful or sate span for the product. 4. We also investigated whether Tectum had ever applied for or received a CCMC (a division of NRC) product listing, making it an acceptable product under current Building Code regulations, and there is NO Listing. A CCMC listing would review and verify.manufacturer's claims of fitness and suitability for uses listed in their documents. 5. We recommend that the two excessively damaged panels be removed and replaced. As discussed, the replacement may most efficiently be carried out with steel roof deck; 3" deep x 0.030"zinc coated (Vicwcst RD308 or RD306); puddle weld to. the joists at 12" c/c, with minimum 2" bearing on the roof joists. 6. We also have some concern that the entire roof is damaged and has less capacity than originally built by at least 15%, based on a comparison of loading tables for 3" and 2.5" thick "Tectum 1" panels at the typical span condition of 6 ft. The combined loading (snow plus dead weight) required on the general roof area (ie not beside the high wall where snow can be :higher) will be about 40 psf on the decking;. The design capacity of the decking might be 25 to 30 psf when used over a 6 ft span however, no capacity is listed at this span and any presumption of capacity may be unreasonable in any case. This noted deficient capacity appears to be confirmed by the permanent sag of the Tectum panels which we. observed on the site. 7. It is our recommendation that the roof be reinforced by adding steel sections (channels or angles) between the steel joists, to reduce the span of the decking. The arrangement of steel and sizing shall be confirmed and designed. Design should in our view, take a conservative approach and reduce the Tectum spans to allow relatively high local loading. Note that to carry out this reinforcement, the floor and walls need temporary protection and a moveable scaffold wiI I need to be used for the steel placement and welding, Given that the decking has a deformity, setting straight pieces of steel under a curved deck will require some site adjustments to obtain fit. It may also be advantageous to delay the placing of the ,,ravel ballast on the roof until after this reinforcing is done. Painting of the roof will likely be required after the reinforcing is done. . r' o cry G. Egberts, P.Eng: t EGBERTS ENGINES RING LIMITED 5 G.A.L. EGBERTS a 12943015 t.r 10 0 ~90 y~ct of 06' _.__-Page 2 ATTACHMENT# 3,._,,,.. TO REPORT# 261 of 777 y L Photo 1 - view of north west corner of roof, with savv-cut cross-cut damage ! $ i ~ ^d. 'tom i ~ + t. {ra'4~ ~ a SL ~ `C~3 f Photo 2 - optional view of north west corner of roof Page 3 -3 ~~S Old- ~ 'fectttm Roof Deck Products-Tectum 1 ATTACFiMENT# TO REPORT# of~ http://wwtiv.Cectufn,con/tectunii.htln 62 { LA 0 Roof Deck Products Search TECTIIIA I Tectum I - TECTIIM III Producy..,;'iheet °ro)er„1 Pi!:tures Tr G^nnicai Qirta TECTllM E . Tectuni I is lypk;ely used In luw-sivpe appllwiiw ~S and peuvides a thermal Uanid, for lield- _ applied foam plastics. If Is comitallblewith virtually all roof installation materials. Underside c:D woosed joints have attractive beveled edges LS (long span) panels are available with steel - channel reinforcement. The Tectum I Roof Deck System consists of standard Tectum panels in 37 •s•„y _ either plank or the configurations. TECTUM I Roof DECK PLANK AND LONG SPAN PLANK Tectum Roof Plank with a T&G edge i5 available in all Tectum roof deck systems. Tectum Lang Span Plank, available only in Tectum f panel, uses a 16-gaugn galvan+zeut slnal channel tnr j _ - _ - increased spans. These products are appfIcable to mat and pitched roots. ' 1 = Fcr qrc pbatnv f cal M t r ease.e'n n prr}nct i Nn= 'Out,", Q online Complete wiry erlucaAion Class for troth AIA and slate credit as weA as qualityina for HSW cretlil. JAI } Tectum t Roof Plank please rJiw,_P C . to bollin. ROOF DECK TILE Tectum Roof Deck Tile uses arty of the Tectum panels to span between steel toes or concrete joists- The rabbeted edges of Tectum ilk rest on Steel lee ftlilge5 or on lop of concrete joists. Spaces between file and tees, or the and anchors in concrete joists. are filled with Tectum grout for excellent anchorage and wind uplift resistance. Custom lengths allow roof design with no e7posed end joints. Tectum I Roof Tile TECTUM I -CTD (Concealed Tee Deck) The Teclum I - CTO (Concealed Tee Deck) system uses a Y-thick Tectum I panel kerfed to accept a manmum size #218 bulb tee. The flanges of the steel tee are concealed in the body of the Tectum panel, The Te lum CTD system allows spans up to 10' without visible edge support. ~ ~ S Y T Tectum I CTD TECTUM ROOF DECK - LIGHTWEIGHT INSULATING CONCRETE The Teclum Roof Deck - UMC System uses Teclum roof plank and the to provide a unique and structural substrate for LWIC (Lightweight Insulating Concrete) topping. This system can be used over steel or wood structural systems, The porous nature of Tectum decks allows the LVYIC to dry from the underside of the L WIC slurry The result is a structural, acoustical deck with permanent insulation. The deck can be rerooled without costly replacement and disposal of the enstinO insulation. This roof deck system has proven to be tong lasting and economical for flat and low-slope roof decks. I is an idoal Wuhan in aroat whom higher allowable shear value is are required. CODE LISTINGS • ICC-E.S Evaluation RepOr7 (FSR-.1712) • MBCI (Construclion No, 451) ,,o,ta. s !Qyuior 1 Rr <rt. ()7:k r_E0 l SpccifrCationy I C?raorngs I i_uerature I £tu11C~?ns, Nr,•ws FAQI, I Sarrpint ( Hnny) Since 1949 Tectum inc., PR So. 3002, W-k, OH 47058 • 888977.9691 • 740-}45.9691 Copoghte 2010 1 of 1 06/07/2010 5:32 PM ATTACHMENT# TO REPORT#6&S 64-0 a 963 of , The Noise Control Solution TECTUM ROOF DECK DESIGN GUIDELINES DESIGN LOAD DATA** System Thickness*** Wt. fpsf)*** Product 24" 30" 36" 38" 40" 42" 44" 48" 50" 52" 54" 60" 66" 72" Plank 2" 3.5 1 130 75 50 45 40 35 2W' 4.5 1 150 120 80 70 60 50 45 35 3" 5.3 1 200 125 102 91 82 74 65 50 45 40 35- 1 Long Span Plank, 2" 3.8 1 130 75 75 75 70 64 57 50 45 40 35 r -ii 2y" 4.7 1 150 120 120 120 114 103 93 77 70 65 60 SO 35 44 -i► 3" 5.5 1 200 125 125 125 125 120 1,15 110 104 96 88 71 58 50 All pubWished design loads are based on minimum safety factor of four. For example, SO psf design load has an ultimate load of 200 psf. 'Thickness and weight are nominal. For loads greater than 200 lbs., contact Tectum Inc. Technical Department f E t 3 ° ft"f>~ 'I www.tectum.com 888-977-9691 Phone 800-832-8869 Fax Email: info@tectum.com ATTACHMENT# 3 TO REPORT# S 614 264 HIGHER ROOF - 46" ABOVE GYM ROOF 16'-10" NEW' R OF D CK . 13' X 17 FT NEW ROOF DECK i REMOVE TECTUM DECK & PLACE VICWEST 3" X 0,030 RD308 OR 3 6 . . . . . . . . . . . . . NEW GALV STEEL ROOF" DECK WELD TO JOISTS ® 12" C/C AND PROVIDE MIN 2" BEARING ON STEE 6' I w w g S o: z 0 a 0 r tO ~ ~ w w aor PROJECT: EGBERTS ENGINEERING LIMITED EAST SHORE COMMUNITY CENTRE OQPOfESSIpNq~ CONSULTING ENGINEERS. F~ 3311 BAWEW AVE. SUET 106 910 LIVERPOOL ROAD, PICKERING TE~ 416) 221°-996'9 G. EGBER DRAWN BY. JOB. NO. G.A. L. E. 2010-100 TITLE; 301 CHECKED BY: DWG. NO. PART ROOF FRAMING REPAIR DECK 10 P~v SCALE 1~B"=I'-0" ~c 0 DATE: JULY 2010 IS K - 1 ATTACH MENT# TO REPORT# 265 c., It I A tt .Z " t A I~ IV, PROJECT: EGBERTS ENGINEERING LIMITED ~~s ss,o~CONSULTING ENGINEERS. EAST SHORE COMMUNITY CENTRE < 3311 BAYVIEW AVE. SURF 106 (U ri WiLLOWDALE. ONTARIO 910 LIVERPOOL ROAD. PICKERING TEL (416) 221-9969 G.A.L. EG'BERTS Wrt BY: J08. NO. G.A. L E. 2010-100 TITLE: 12~: 3' 1F iECKEa BY: DWG. NO. DECK BEARING G._L _E SCALE; 1j8.,_1,-0., ~'A F r;' - DAVE: JULY 2010 S K 2 ATTACHMENT# TO REPORT# X54 ~ 266 I s s ~ 4 N V) f tYM ear I PROJECT: ~EGBERTS ENGINEERING LIMITED EAST SHORE COMMUNITY CENTRE CONSULTING ENGINEERS 3311 BAYVIEW AVE. SUIT 106 WILLOWDALE, ONTARIO 910 LIVERPOOL ROAD, PICKERING TE7_.(416) 221-.a464 DRAWN BY: JOB. NO. TITLE: GA. L. E. 2010-100 CHECKED BY: HVAC UNIT SUPPORT G.A.L.E DING. NQ. scALE: 1/8"=V-0" DATE: K 3 JULY 2010 ATTACH MENT#~_ TO REPORT#~ou ^f ~ of ~ 2 6 7 The Corporation of the City of Pickering By-law No. Being a by-law to authorize the Roof Reinforcement at East Shore Community Centre in the City of Pickering and the issuance of debentures therefor in the amount of $150,000. 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 Roof Reinforcement at East Shore Community Centre project; and, Whereas before the Council of the City authorized the Roof Reinforcement at East Shore Community Centre project, 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 OES 04-11 on the date hereof and awarded Tender T-25-2010 for the Roof Reinforcement at East Shore Community Centre project. ATTACHNFNT# Z 70REPORT# 2L of 1?1 268 By-law No. Page 2 Now therefore the Council of The Corporation of the City of Pickering hereby enacts as follows: 1. That the City proceed with the project referred to as "Roof Reinforcement at East Shore Community Centre"; 2: That the estimated costs of the project in the amount of $153,658 be financed as follows: a) That the sum of $150,000 be financed by the issue of debentures by The Regional Municipality of Durham over a period not to exceed ten (10) years; b) That the sum of $3,658 be funded from Current Funds; 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 2011 and continuing thereafter until the loan is repaid. By-law read a first, second and third time and finally passed this 17th day of January, 2011. David Ryan, Mayor Debbie Shields, City Clerk