Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
September 10, 2012
Cirg o0 Executive Committee Meeting Agenda Monday, September 10, 2012 DICKERING Council Chambers 7:00 pm Chair: Councillor Dickerson (I) Matters for Consideration Pages 1. Director, Community Services, Report CS 07-12 1-10 Don Beer Arena Snack Bar Concession -Pickering Hockey Association Licence Renewal Recommendation 1. That Report CS 07-12 of the Director, Community Services regarding the Pickering Hockey Association Lease Renewal be received; and 2. That the Mayor and the City Clerk be authorized to execute a renewal Concession Licence Agreement to permit the Pickering Hockey Association to continue to operate the snack bar concession facility at Don Beer Arena from September 1, 2012 to April 30, 2015 that is in the form and substance acceptable to the Director, Community Services and the City Solicitor, with the option of mutually extending this licence agreement for a further two years. 2. Director, Community Services, Report CS 15-12 11-19 Emerald Ash Borer (EAB) Recommendation 1. That Report CS 15-12 of the Director, Community Services concerning the Emerald Ash Borer be received; 2. That Council review and endorse EAB Strategy No. 2 as outlined in this report in managing the Emerald Ash Borer (EAB); 3. That funding of $300,000 yearly be provided for an ongoing program to be included in future capital budget plans for the purposes of EAB Management; Accessible • For information related to accessibility requirements please contact D I C V E G Linda Roberts I Imo.G Phone: 905.420.4660 extension 2928 TTY: 905.420.1739 Email: Irobertsaoickerina.ca Cali Executive Committee Meeting Agenda w Monday, September 10, 2012 PICKERING Council Chambers 7:00 pm Chair: Councillor Dickerson 4. That City staff release a further information package for the purposes of educating and notifying our residents of this insect and its effect on Ash trees within the municipality; 5. That a letter from Mayor and Council, be forwarded to the Local Provincial • MPP and Federal MP, with a request seeking support for Provincial and Federal funding assistance. 3. Director, Community Services, Report CS 40-12 20-34 Continued Funding for Environmental Stewardship Pickering (ESP) Recommendation 1. That Report CS 40-12 of the Director, Community Services regarding continued funding for Environmental Stewardship Pickering (formerly the Healthy Neighbours Program) to provide environmental leadership training, event support and volunteer opportunities be received; 2. That Council endorse continued participation in the Environmental Stewardship Pickering Program; 3. That Council consider extending the existing annual grant to Toronto and Region Conservation Authority in the amount of $25,000 for the period of 2013 - 2017 (5 year commitment) during 2013 budget deliberations; 4. That Council authorize the appropriate City officials to bring this forward in 2013. 4. Director, Community Services, Report CS 41-12 35-43 Tender No. T-16-2012 -Dixie Road Streetlight Replacement Recommendation 1. That Report CS 41-12 of the Director, Community Services regarding the tender for the Dixie Road Streetlight Replacement project be received; 2. That Tender No.T-16-2012 submitted by Fellmore Electrical, in the amount of $162,656.32 (HST included), be accepted; Cali 4 Executive Committee Meeting Agenda Monday, September 10, 2012 PICKERING Council Chambers 7:00 pm Chair: Councillor Dickerson 3. That the total gross project cost of$221,416.32 (HST included), including the tender amount and other associated costs, and the total net project cost of $199,392.25 (net of HST rebate) be approved; 4. That Council authorize the Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer to increase the finance from the Federal Gas Tax, as provided for in the 2011 approved Streetlight Capital Budget from $90,000.00 to $199,392.25; and 5. That the appropriate City of Pickering officials be authorized to take necessary action to give effect thereto. 5. Director, Community Services, Report CS 43-12 44-62 Pickering Recreation Complex Arena Concession Licence Agreement -Request for Proposal No. RFP-5-2012 Recommendation 1. That Report CS 43-12 of the Director, Community Services regarding the Pickering Recreation Complex Arena Concession Licence Agreement be received; 2. That RFP-5-2012 submitted by Recreation Leisure Services Ltd. to operate the concession facility at Pickering Recreation Complex Arena be accepted; 3. That the Mayor and the City Clerk be authorized to execute a Concession Licence Agreement to permit the Recreation Leisure Services Ltd. to operate the concession facility at Pickering Recreation Complex Arena from September 1, 2012 to April 30, 2015 that is in the form and substance acceptable to the Director, Community Services and the City Solicitor. 6. Director, Community Services, Report CS 45-12 63-79 City of Pickering Comments on the Regional Cycling Plan Review Recommendation 1. That Report CS 45-12 of the Director, Community Services regarding the Regional Cycling Plan Review be received; 2. That Council advise Regional Council that it supports: o� Executive Committee Meeting Agenda Monday, September 10, 2012 PICKERING Council Chambers 7:00 pm Chair: Councillor Dickerson a) the proposed Primary Cycling Network as set out in Attachment#2 to Report CS 45-12; b) the proposed Cycling Treatment Types as set out in Attachment#5 to Report CS 45-12 subject to incorporating the treatment types for Regional Roads in Seaton as shown on the Cycling and Pedestrian Facilities Map in the Regional Class EA for the Central Pickering Development Plan; c) the Region's proposed funding change for paved shoulders on Regional Roads from the former 50/50 cost sharing arrangement with the area municipalities, to the Region now being 100% responsible for the capital construction costs for all on-road cycling facilities and paved shoulders on Regional Roads; d) the Region continuing its practice of being 100% responsible for maintenance of all on-road cycling facilities and paved shoulders on Regional Roads that form part of the Primary Cycling Network; 3. That Council request Regional Council to: a) dedicate a minimum of$500,000 annually from its Roads Capital Program to fund the construction, repair, maintenance, monitoring and promotion of the Regional Cycling Plan; b) revise its practice where the Region is only responsible for providing the platform for multi use paths within Regional Road rights-of-way, such that it also be responsible for 50/50 cost sharing with area municipalities for constructions costs (i.e. granular and asphalt), signage, marking and other amenities; c) include a revision to the current Regional policy such that the implementation of the Regional Cycling Plan is not confined strictly to correspond with road construction projects, but rather be prioritized and constructed, as appropriate, to close gaps and facilitate key connections along road segments that are not necessarily due for reconstruction; d) direct Regional staff to prepare a more detailed phasing program, in 5 year increments, for the 2017-2032 time frame; and 4. Further, that the City Clerk forward a copy of Report CS 45-12 to the Regional Municipality of Durham and all local municipalities in Durham Region. Ca 00 Executive Committee Meeting Agenda , ,., ..�..- Monday, September 10, 2012 PI KERIN Council Chambers 7:00 pm Chair: Councillor Dickerson 7. Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer, Report CST 22-12 80-85 2012 Final Tax Due Dates for Commercial, Industrial and Multi-Residential Realty Tax Classes Recommendation 1. That Report CST 22-12 of the Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer be received; 2. That the Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer be authorized to issue the final 2012 Tax Bills for Commercial, Industrial and Multi-residential properties with a due date of October 12, 2012; 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. 8. Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer, Report CST 23-12 86-146 2011 Municipal Performance Measurement Program — Provincially Mandated Public Reporting of Performance Measures Recommendation That Report CST 23-12 of the Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer be received for information. 9. Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer, Report CST 24-12 147-149 Repealing of Debenture By-laws Recommendation 1. That Report CST 24-12 of the Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer be received; and, City 4 Executive Committee Meeting Agenda Monday, September 10, 2012 PICKERING Council Chambers 7:00 pm Chair: Councillor Dickerson 2. That the Draft By-law attached be passed. 10. Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer, report CST 25-12 150-160 Cash Position Report as at June 30, 2012 Recommendation It is recommended that Report CST 25-12 from the Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer be received for information. 11. Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer, Report CST 26-12 161-236 Tender/Contract Approval -Council's Summer Recess Recommendation 1. That Report CST 26-12 of the Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer regarding tender and contract approvals during Council's 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-1-2012 Architectural & Engineering Design Services New Operations Centre, Tender No. T-2-2012 Liverpool Road Reconstruction, Tender No. T-7-2012, Supply and Installation of Sports Field Lighting Dunmoore Park Softball Field #1, Tender No. T-14-2012 Rosebank South Park Landscape Construction, Tender No. T-18-2012, West Shore Boulevard Road Improvements and Provincial Vendor of Record (VOR) - Ricoh Print Management Proposal and Purchase of Print Management Software. 12. Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer, Report CST 27-12 237-238 Write-off of Fire Services Costs Associated with the Claremont General Store Fire Recommendation 1. That Report CST 27-12 of the Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer be received; and, o0 Executive Committee Meeting Agenda Monday, September 10, 2012 PICKERING Council Chambers 7:00 pm Chair: Councillor Dickerson 2. That the outstanding amount receivable from Seongmin Park & Kyungjoo Sung in the amount of$13,750.99 and accumulated interest of$2,853.18 be written off in 2012; and 3. That the appropriate officials of the City of Pickering be authorized to take the necessary actions to give effect hereto. (II) Other Business (Ill) Adjournment Carl Report to _ 4m_ - Executive Committee PICKE Report Number: CS 07-12 Date: September 10, 2012 j 4 - From: Everett Buntsma Director, Community Services Subject: Don Beer Arena Snack Bar Concession - Pickering Hockey Association Licence Renewal - File: A-1440 Recommendation: 1. That Report CS 07-12 of the Director, Community Services regarding the Pickering Hockey Association Lease Renewal be received; and 2. That the Mayor and the City Clerk be authorized to execute a renewal Concession Licence Agreement to permit the Pickering Hockey Association to continue to operate the snack bar concession facility at Don Beer Arena from September 1, 2012 to April 30, 2015 that is in the form and substance acceptable to the Director, Community Services and the City Solicitor, with the option of mutually extending this licence agreement for a further two years. Executive Summary: The Pickering Hockey Association have an existing Licence Agreement to operate the snack bar concession facilities at Don Beer Arena. The Pickering Hockey Association have requested to renew this agreement for a further three years. 9 The Community Services Department recommend that a renewal agreement be initiated with the Pickering Hockey Association. Financial Implications: The revenue to be generated from September 1, 2012 to April 30, 2013 is $1,100 monthly (plus HST) for a total of$9,944.00; from September 1, 2013 to April 30, 2014 is $1,122.00 (plus HST) monthly fora total of$10,142.88; and from September 1, 2014 to April 30, 2015 is $1,144.44 (plus HST) monthly for a total of $10,345.74. Discussion: On August 3, 1999, Council enacted By-law#5540/99 to authorize the execution of a Licence Agreement with the Pickering Hockey Association Incorporated for the operation of the Don Beer Arena Snack Bar Concessions. This agreement was subsequently extended to April 30, 2012. The Pickering Hockey Association have requested to renew this agreement again for a further three year term. The renewal agreement allows the Pickering Hockey Report CS 07-12 February 13, 2012 Subject: Don Beer Arena Snack Bar Concessions Page 2 02 Association to continue to operate the Don Beer Snack Bar Concession from September 1, 2012 to April 30, 2015. The renewal agreement also allows for a mutually agreed extension of two years subject to an inflation allowance for rent increases. The Director, Community Services and the Division Head, Culture & Recreation recommend that a renewal agreement be initiated with the Pickering Hockey Association. Attachments: 1. Concession Licence Agreement Prepared By: Approve,d/ - •,s rsed By: 1�' Marisa Carpi ' verett Buntsma Manager, C I re & Recreation Director, C tpurtity Services Stephen Reynolds Division Head, Culture & Recreation :mc Recommended for the consideration of Pickering City Council 0.2}64,,V zoiz Tony Prevedel, P.Eng. :J Chief Administrative Officer CORP0227-07/01 revised ` ..r, Cs C I THIS CONCESSION LICENCE AGREEMENT is made as of September 1, 2012. BETWEEN : PICKERING HOCKEY ASSOCIATION ("PHA") - and - THE CORPORATION OF THE CITY OF PICKERING (the "City") WHEREAS the City is the owner of the Don Beer Arena which contains a snack bar concession facility; and WHEREAS the City wishes to retain the PHA to operate the concession on its behalf. NOW THEREFORE the parties agree as follows: Definitions 1. In this Agreement, (a) "Concession" means the snack bar concession facility located in the Don Beer Arena owned by the City located at 940 Dillingham Road in the City of Pickering; (b) "Director" means the Director of the City's Community Services Department or a designate; and (c) "term" means the term of this Agreement, including any renewal, as set out in Section 2. Term 2. (a) The City grants to the PHA the right to operate the Concession for the purpose of providing snack bar services during the months of September to April, both inclusive, for the period beginning September 1, 2012 and ending April 30, 2015. (b) If both parties agree, this Agreement may be extended "on the same terms and Pickering Hockey Association Concession Agreement -i Page 2 conditions for a further period beginning September 1, 2015 and ending April 30, 2017 on the same terms and conditions except as to rental rate. The monthly rental rate for the extended term will be mutually agreed upon prior to this extension, failing which the term shall not be extended and this Agreement shall be at an end. 3. Either the PHA or the City may terminate this Agreement prior to its expiry by giving 90 • days written notice to the other. Fees 4. The PHA shall pay to the City monthly installments on the first day of each month in the amount of: 1. September 1, 2012 ending April 30, 2013, $1,100.00 plus HST for a total of $9,944.00. 2. September 1, 2013 ending April 30, 2014, $1,122.00 plus HST for a total of $10,142.88. 3. September 1, 2014 ending April 30'2015, $1,144.44 plus HST for a total of $10,345.74. Operations 5. The PHA and all of its servants, agents and employees shall, (a) comply strictly with all applicable by-laws, rules and regulations governing the conduct and operation of its business in the Concession; (b) operate the Concession during the times and on the days agreed to by the Director; (c) keep accurate books and records of the operation of the Concession and allow the Director to inspect the books and records at any time; (d) obtain all necessary permits, licenses and approvals that may be required in connection with the operation of the Concession; (e) PHA shall pay all realty, business or other taxes or rates that may be levied against the lands upon which the Don Beer Sports Arena is located, against the Arena Concession operation or against PHA as a result of its operation of the Arena Concession. (f) maintain in good repair the Concession and the equipment in it; (g) maintain the Concession in a clean, sanitary and attractive condition satisfactory to the Director throughout the term and, at the end of the term, 2 Pickering Hockey Association Concession Agreement ��"`�e. 3 ` Page 3 �.F u repair or replace any damage to the Concession, reasonable wear and tear excepted; (h) provide a good standard of service to the public patronizing the Concession; (i) conduct concession operations that are in compliance with the Province of Ontario's Eat Smart! Program for Recreation Centres; and (j) comply with the provisions of the agreement dated September 1, 2003 between the City and Coca-Cola Bottling Ltd. set out in Schedule A to this Agreement. 6. The PHA shall obtain the approval of the Director before altering, adding to or varying in any way all or any part of the Concession. Any approved alteration, addition or variation shall be undertaken at the PHA's sole expense and shall become the property of the City at the end of the term. Insurance 7. Prior to occupying the Concession, the PHA, at its own expense, shall provide, (a) comprehensive general public liability insurance, identifying the City as an additional insured, including coverage for personal injury, contractual liability, tenant's legal liability, non-owned automobile liability, death and property damage, on an occurrence basis with respect to the business carried on at the Concession and the PHA's use and occupancy of the Concession, with • coverage for any one occurrence or claim of not less than $2,000,000 which insurance shall protect the City in respect of claims by the PHA as if the City was separately insured; (b) insurance in respect of fire and other perils covering the leasehold improvements, trade fixtures, furniture and equipment in the Concession for not less than the full replacement cost thereof; and (c) a certificate of insurance coverage in a form satisfactory to the City, prior to the PHA occupying the Concession, which insurance coverage shall be kept in full force and effect throughout the term. 8. The PHA shall not do or omit or permit to be done anything which causes any insurance premium of the City to be increased, and if any insurance premium shall be so increased, the PHA shall pay to the City forthwith upon demand the amount of such increase. If notice of cancellation or lapse shall be given respecting any insurance policy of the City or if any insurance policy shall be cancelled or refused to be renewed by an insurer by reason of the use or occupation of the Concession, the PHA shall forthwith remedy or rectify such use or occupation upon being requested to do so in writing by the City and if the PHA shall • 3 i Pickering Hockey Association Concession Agreement J Page 4 fail to do so the City may, at its option, terminate this Agreement forthwith by notice to the PHA and the PHA shall immediately vacate the Concession. Liability of the City 9. The City shall not be liable to the PHA for any loss of or damage to the Concession or any equipment or inventory in it, whether caused by fire, theft, burglary or otherwise, unless such loss or damage was caused by the negligence of the City, its servants, agents or employees. 10. The PHA shall indemnify the City and each of its servants, employees and agents from and against all actions, suits, claims and demands which may be brought against any of them, and from and against all losses, costs, charges, damages and expenses which may be sustained by any of them as a result of PHA's use and occupation of the Concession. Default 11 . If at any time the PHA is in default in the performance of any of the obligations under this Agreement and such default continues for 15 days after the receipt by the PHA of notice from the Director setting out the particulars of such default, the City shall have the right to terminate this Agreement forthwith and thereupon all the rights of the PHA under this Agreement shall immediately cease and the City shall not be liable for payment to the PHA of any moneys whatsoever by reason of such termination. 12. If any outstanding fees are not paid as required by this Agreement, the City shall be entitled, at its option, and in addition to any other remedy provided herein, to retain and dispose of any equipment installed in the Concession in order to satisfy the outstanding fees and the costs of collecting them. General 13. The Director shall have the right to enter the Concession at any time for any reason provided all reasonable efforts are made to minimize any disruption to the PHA's use of the Concession. 14. PHA shall not exhibit or allow to be exhibited in the Concession any sign, notice, notice board, painting, design or advertisement without the prior consent of the Director. 15. This Agreement shall not be assignable by the PHA without the consent of the City, which consent may be arbitrarily refused. 16. This Agreement shall enure to the benefit of and be binding upon the parties and their respective successors and permitted assigns. 17. No amendment to this Agreement shall be effective unless it is in writing and signed by both parties. 4 . 0 / - ., Pickering Hockey Association Concession Agreement 1 ✓ Page 5 18. (1) Any notice to the City under this Agreement shall be in writing and shall be delivered to the following address: Pickering Civic Complex One The Esplanade Pickering, ON L1V 6K7 Attention: City Clerk (2) Any notice to the PHA under this Agreement shall be in writing and shall be delivered to the following address: Pickering Hockey Association 1737 Ada Court Pickering, ON L1V 2Y9 Attention: Gary Watters, President (3) Notice shall be sufficiently given if delivered in person or sent by registered mail or sent by facsimile transmission during normal business hours on a business day. (4) Each notice sent shall be deemed to have been received on the day it was delivered or on the third business day after it was mailed. (5) The parties may change their address for notice by giving notice to the other in the manner provided in this section. IN WITNESS WHEREOF the parties have signed this Agreement. PICKERING HOCKEY.ASSOCIATION THE CORPORATION OF THE CITY OF PICKERING David Ryan, Mayor • Debbie Shields, City Clerk 5 r`; s? `7 — ( 2_ pQOc SCHEDULE A Certain provisions of the Agreement dated September 1, 2003, between the CITY (herein referred to as the "CITY") and Coca-Cola Bottling Ltd., (therein referred to as the "Company") 1. For the purposes of this Agreement, (a) "Arenas" means the Arenas located at 940 Dillingham Road; (b) "Event" means any scheduled or rescheduled sporting event, sporting competition or sporting contest conducted in either of the Arenas; (c) "Soft Drink Beverages" means, (i) all carbonated and non-carbonated soft drink beverages; (ii) all syrups from which carbonated and non-carbonated soft drink beverages may be prepared for immediate consumption by the addition of carbonated or non-carbonated water; and (iii) all carbonated and non-carbonated fruit drinks, machine-vended fruit juices, potable waters and any other non-alcoholic beverages for immediate consumption, including all syrups and preparations from which the same may be prepared; (d) "Soft Drink Beverages of the Company" means those Soft Drink Beverages which from time to time are manufactured, sold or distributed by the Company; (e) "Soft Drink Dispensing Equipment" means those devices for the dispensing or storage of soft drink beverages more particularly described in Schedule A hereto and such further similar devices supplied by the Company pursuant to this Agreement; (f) "Term" means the term of this Agreement which shall commence at 6:00 am on September 1, 2003 and shall expire at midnight on August 31 , 2013. ADVERTISING - HOCKEY SCOREBOARD, TIME-OF-DAY CLOCK AND MENU BOARDS 2. (1) During the Term, the Company shall have the exclusive right to place advertising, at its cost, on the hockey scoreboard, the clock and the menu boards by decorating them in full colour with advertising material for one or DJ v g .a `, • Pickering Hockey Association Concession Agreement I Page 7 more of the Soft Drink Beverages of the Company and may change the advertising material from time to time during the Term. (2) The Company shall, at its cost, maintain and repair the advertising in good and attractive order, normal wear and tear only excluded. 3. The CITY shall not permit any commercial signage or messages other than the advertising material of the Company to be placed on the ice re-surfacing unit, the hockey scoreboard, the clock or the menu boards. 4. The CITY shall not permit any advertising, promotion or mention of any nature or description, whether visual or oral (including the public address system in the Arenas), of any Soft Drink Beverage which is not a Soft Drink Beverage of the Company in or about the Complex including its structures, hallways, concourses or at any outside entrances to the Complex and regardless of whether or not it is within the view or hearing of any existing or future spectator seat in the Complex, save and except where necessary to describe a team or a member of a team that is sponsored by a Soft Drink Beverage company other than the Company. 5. The CITY shall not grant to any manufacturer, bottler or supplier of Soft Drink Beverages, other than Soft Drink Beverages of the Company, the right to associate itself or its Soft Drink Beverages with the Complex or any part thereof in any manner directly or by implication. SOFT DRINK DISPENSING EQUIPMENT 6. The CITY, at its cost, shall keep the Soft Drink Dispensing Equipment in good repair, condition and working order and shall furnish any parts required to keep it in good mechanical and working order. 7. Without the prior written consent of the Company, the CITY shall not make any alterations, additions or improvements to the equipment; all alterations, additions and improvements made to the equipment shall belong to and become the property of the Company upon the making of the alteration, addition or improvement. 8. The Soft Drink Dispensing Equipment shall be used by the CITY only in the Complex and shall not be removed therefrom or otherwise disposed of without the prior written consent of the Company. 9. The Company may, at its cost, supply and install such additional or replacement Soft Drink Dispensing Equipment as the Company from time to time considers necessary to service the public demand for Soft Drink Beverages at the Complex at such locations within the Complex as are agreed upon by the Parties; such 7 L� L L_ 0. IP'Cc_ of.. ; Pickering Hockey Association Concession Agreement Page 8 equipment shall be treated as Soft Drink Dispensing Equipment for the purposes of this Agreement. 10. The CITY shall at all times during the Term keep all syrup heads of the Soft Drink Dispensing Equipment properly identified with the appropriate trademarks of the Company relating to the Soft Drink Beverages of the Company actually dispensed through the heads. 11. No Soft Drink Beverages (other than fruit juices) may be supplied, sold or distributed in the Complex from soft drink dispensing equipment other than the Soft Drink Dispensing Equipment of the Company. COMPLEX SOFT DRINK BEVERAGE SUPPLY 12. (1) During the Term, the Company shall be the sole and exclusive supplier of Soft Drink Beverages for sale or complimentary distribution in the Complex and all parties from time to time selling or distributing Soft Drink Beverages in the Complex shall purchase for resale or distribution at the Complex only the Soft Drink Beverages of the Company at the Company's then prevailing wholesale prices and trade terms which from time to time may exist, provided always that the said wholesale prices of the Company shall remain competitive with the wholesale prices which are from time to time offered by other manufacturers or distributors of nationally known Soft Drink Beverages. (2) The Company shall provide such brands and quantities of Soft Drink Beverages as it considers necessary to service the public demand thereof at the Complex. 13. Notwithstanding any other provision contained herein, the Company shall not be liable hereunder for failure to supply Soft Drink Beverages due to government action, statute, ordinance or regulation; strike or other labour disturbance or disruption; fire damage; lack of or inability to obtain materials, labour, fuel or supplies; act of God; or any other cause, contingency or circumstance which is beyond the control of the Company. GENERAL 14. The employees, representatives and agents of the Company shall be permitted access to the Complex during normal business hours for any purpose provided for or contemplated in this Agreement. 8 city no a Report to Executive Committee PICKERING Report Number: CS 15-12 Date: September 10, 2012 1 From: Everett Buntsma Director, Community Services Subject: Emerald Ash Borer (EAB) - File: A-1440 Recommendation: 1. That Report CS 15-12 of the Director, Community Services concerning the Emerald Ash Borer be received; 2. That Council review and endorse EAB Strategy No. 2 as outlined in this report in managing the Emerald Ash Borer (EAB); 3. That funding of$300,000 yearly be considered during the 2013 budget process for the purposes of EAB Management; 4. That City staff release a further information package for the purposes of educating and notifying our residents of this insect and its effect on Ash trees within the municipality; 5. That a letter from Mayor and Council, be forwarded to the Local Provincial MPP and Federal MP, with a request seeking support for Provincial and Federal funding assistance. Executive Summary: To provide Council information on the progression of the Emerald Ash Borer in the City of Pickering, and to seek direction on potential mitigation and control programs. It should be noted that once an EAB infected tree dies, they become an immediate liability. There is a definite need for the City to act immediately on this situation by developing a management strategy to deal with Ash trees owned by the municipality. Financial Implications: There will be significant financial implications. The financial information contained in the chart below is based on estimates obtained from other municipalities and private contractors. The need for funds required to manage the impacts associated with EAB will be on-going for an estimated 15 years or more. It should be noted that further infestation could progress faster than anticipated and require immediate action in the removal of infected trees to minimize liability risks. Report CS 15-12 September 10, 2012 Subject: Emerald Ash Borer (EAB) Page 2 • 1 n The Region is not currently providing any resources, financial or otherwise, for the purposes of removal and disposal of infested trees or for the replacement of any trees. EAB Strategy No.1 Strategy No. 1 would be to simply permit EAB to run its course, taking no pro-active action in the treatment or control of the insect. This approach will result in the mortality of existing Ash trees over an estimated period of 5-10 years. Although there will be no costs incurred with chemical treatment, there will be considerable costs associated with removal and replacement of trees, including a need for additional staff and/or contract resources required to undertake and manage all aspects of this work. EAB Strategy No. 2 Strategy No. 2 would involve the City taking a proactive course of action in treating Ash trees (with a diameter of greater than 20 cm) on our streets, estimated to be 3,000 trees. This is based on a set of criteria that other larger cities have developed. For example, the Town of Oakville have determined that healthy Ash trees greater than 20 cm in caliper (dia) would be worthy of treatment on a bi-annual basis for an extended period of time, perhaps as long as 15 years. There is research out of the USA suggesting the treatment timeframe may be reduced depending on a number of factors including the lack of host trees remaining alive to support future generations of EAB. Strategy No. 2 does not include treating street trees less than 20 cm in diameter. As such it will still be necessary to remove and replace 500 Ash trees and again this will require additional staffing resources as outlined in Strategy No. 1. Cost of preventative treatment (avg. $300 per tree per treatment application x 3,000 trees x 7.5.applications over 15 year period) Cost of tree and stump removal (avg. $700 per tree x 500 trees) Cost of tree replacement (avg. $300 per tree x 500 trees) EAB Strategy No. 3 Strategy No. 3 would essentially mirror Strategy No. 2; however, the treatment program would be expanded to include all Ash trees less than 20cm in diameter. This strategy will be incrementally more expensive; however, significantly more trees will be retained on our streets. Over and above the added work load EAB will contribute to the Operations & Fleet Services, deceased privately owned trees could very possibly create an increased work load for our By-law enforcement section where it becomes necessary to issue removal orders under the Property Standards By-law for infractions concerning trees posing a safety hazard. While there are several alternatives in dealing with managing the effects of EAB, as outlined above, there are no alternatives in completely stopping the spread of the insect or the ensuing damage that will result from its presence in the municipality. CORP0227-07/01 revised Report CS 15-12 September 10, 2012 Subject: Emerald Ash Borer (EAB) Page 3 3 Discussion: An official street tree inventory is currently underway that will aid us in determining the location, health and size of our Ash tree populations within the road allowance. During the tree inventory, staff will be assessing the quality of each Ash tree canopy/branching to help determine the most economical and sustainable option available for each individual tree. This will also help estimate future cost to treat chemically over the next number of years. In addition to street trees, there are additional Ash trees in our parks and woodlots. A total quantity of these trees is not yet known. With the confirmation of EAB in Pickering, there is little doubt that its effects will result in a dramatic transformation in the appearance of many streets and parks where Ash trees are the dominant species. Additionally, there will be substantial costs associated with EAB over the next 10 -15 years. Research and experience in other municipalities suggest that EAB, if left unchecked, will eliminate 99% of the Ash Trees within the municipality. With approximately over 3,500 Ash trees in our current inventory and hundreds more in our open space and wooded lands, costs for removing and replacing trees will be significant. In addition to the actual financial impacts, the aesthetic and ecological impacts could be much more significant. Many of our Ash trees are large specimens lining our streets and parks that have developed high full canopies. Streetscapes will be dramatically transformed as decades of tree development and mature canopy will be lost over a few years or less. A loss of tree canopy of this magnitude could also raise concerns and demands in some neighbourhoods with respect to the diminished quality and character of the neighbourhood streetscape. In addition to the Ash trees located on municipal lands, there are many others located on private property in Pickering that will also be impacted. Although the numbers of private trees are not known, it is almost certain that large quantities of privately owned trees will be destroyed as the EAB infestation progresses. A thorough public education and awareness of EAB and its implications is highly recommended through all means possible. Attachments: 1. Memo from S. McKay (dated March 15, 2012) CORP0227-07/01 revised Report CS 15-12 September 10, 2012 Subject: Emerald Ash Borer (EAB) Page 4 1' Prepared By: Approved/Endorsed :y: Scott McKay Everett Bunts Coordinator, Fores ry Management Director, Community Services rant Smith, Manager, Operations & Fleet Services GS:nw Recommended for the consideration of Pickering City Council Tony Prevedel, P.Eng. Chief Administrative Officer CORP0227-07/01 revised Cc3 r�A _ C 4 I 4! Memo To: Rob Gagen . March 15, 2012 (Acting) Supervisor, Parks Operations From: Scott McKay Coordinator, Forestry Management Copy: Director, Community Services Manager, Operations & Fleet Services Subject: Emerald Ash Borer Recommendations - File: 0-8130-002-12 Recommendations That the City review and endorse one of the strategies outlined in this report in managing the Emerald Ash Borer (EAB); 1. That City staff release a further information package for the purposes of educating and notifying our residents of this insect and its effect on Ash trees within the municipality; 2. That sufficient funding be included in future capital budget plans for the purposes of EAB Management; 3. That a letter from Mayor and Council, be forwarded to the Local Provincial M.P.P and Federal M.P. with a request seeking support for Provincial and Federal funding assistance. Purpose of the Report To provide information on the progression of the Emerald Ash Borer in.the City of Pickering and to seek direction on potential mitigation and control programs. Background Emerald Ash Borer (EAB) is invasive to our Ash tree population. EAB is a destructive wood- boring insect that prefers all Ash tree species as its favoured host to complete its life cycle. The EAB completes its most destructive period of its life cycle in its larval stage. These larvae feed on the inner bark and sap wood of the host tree creating galleries in the main trunk and larger upper branches. Depending on the level of infestation, repeated life cycles of this insect will eventually kill the tree within a few years of initial infestation. The adult borer is an emerald green-winged beetle that has the capability of moving rapidly across the landscape in its quest of finding new host trees within which to complete its life cycle. i ,, First discovered in Canada in 2002 EAB originates in China, Japan, Korea and several other far eastern countries. The insect was first detected in North America in the Eastern United States and has since migrated north into Canada. It was discovered in Windsor, Ontario in 2002 where it has caused severe mortality in the Ash tree population. More recently the insect has been confirmed throughout Eastern Toronto, Durham Region, including Oshawa and Whitby. The Region is not currently providing any resources, financial or otherwise, for the purposes of removal and disposal of infested trees or for the replacement of any trees. Given that the Emerald Ash Borer has now been confirmed in various locations throughout the City of Pickering. Staff anticipates that the population will continue to rapidly expand, as has been the case in many other communities throughout southern Ontario where the insects have been present for a number of years. What Others Are Doing The approach that other municipalities are taking with this insect appears to vary among the southerly municipalities. For example, at the end of last year, the City of Vaughan had chosen to let the insect run its course by taking no action in proactively chemically treating any Ash trees. The Town of Richmond Hill is proposing to introduce a management strategy that will involve proactive chemical treatment in 50% of Ash trees meeting a certain criteria based on tree size and condition ratings. The balance of their trees will not be preserved and will be allowed to succumb to the insect. The Town of Oakville is taking a far more proactive course of action that will see 75% of their Ash trees being treated with a commercially available product know as TreeAzinTM which is injected directly into the trunk of the tree. Unfortunately, there appears to be an inconsistent approach between many municipalities in addressing the EAB situation within the quarantined areas of the province. This is due to the apparent lack of leadership on the part of the Canadian Food Inspection Agency (CFIA) and the Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources (MNR). Most of our municipal counterparts agree that these agencies have a large stake in this matter and by all accounts have failed to provide or assist in the provision of the necessary resources to aid in the fight against this invasive pest. As such, many municipalities are ill equipped to effectively manage this serious problem. As a result, this insect now threatens the entire Ash tree population in Ontario. Implementation of Effective EAB Controls Through extensive research staff has determined that there is a product which is relatively new on the market that has proven effective in reducing the EAB population and its effects on the host trees. This product called, TreeAzinTM appears to be the most effective and least toxic alternative. TreeAzinTM is a biological pesticide with its active ingredient derived from the Neem tree. The product is injected under the tree bark into the conductive tissues where it rapidly relocates to all extremities of the tree. TreeAzin is toxic to EAB larva and is effective in reducing fertility in the adult EAB. March 15, 2012 Page 2 Emerald Ash Borer (EAB) k 7 While treatments have shown good results, not all trees can be saved. Chemical injections of TreeAzinTM are considerably expensive because the treatment must be repeated on a bi-annual basis and must continue indefinitely for as long as EAB is present. Approximately 3,500+ Ash Street Trees Will Be Affected in the City of Pickering An official street tree inventory is currently underway that will aid us in determining the location, health and size of our Ash tree populations within the road allowance. During the tree inventory, staff will be assessing the quality of each Ash tree canopy/branching to help determine the most economical and sustainable option available for each individual tree. This will also help estimate future cost to treat chemically over the next number of years. In addition to street trees there are additional Ash trees in our parks and woodlots. A total quantity of these trees is not yet known. Size % Of City Wide Species Qty Cm_ Street Location Dbh Tree Inventory Ash Approx. >20cm 85.7% street trees 3,000 Ash Approx. <20cm 14.3% street trees 500 Ash Unknown Various Unknown at this parks time • At this time there are no immediate plans to inventory our Ash trees within woodlands or open space areas. Staff are aware of where Ash trees are located within City owned lands and will be monitoring and identifying trees for removal to ensure public safety as the EAB infestation progresses. Comments With the confirmation of EAB in Pickering there is little doubt that its effects will result in a dramatic transformation in the appearance of many streets and parks where Ash trees are the dominant species. Additionally, there will be substantial costs associated with EAB over the next 10 -15 years. Research and experience in other municipalities suggest that EAB, if left unchecked, will eliminate 99% of the Ash Trees within the municipality. With approximately over 3,500 Ash trees in our current inventory and hundreds more in our open space and wooded lands, costs for removing and replacing trees will be significant. In addition to the actual financial impacts, the aesthetic and ecological impacts could be much more significant. Many of our Ash trees are large specimens lining our streets and parks that have developed high full canopies. Streetscapes will be dramatically transformed in that decades of tree development and mature canopy will be lost over a few years or less. A loss of tree canopy of this magnitude could also raise concerns and demands in some neighbourhoods with respect to the diminished quality and character of the neighbourhood streetscape. In addition to the Ash trees located on municipal lands there are many others located on private property in Pickering that will also be impacted. Although the numbers of private trees are not March 15, 2012 Page 3 Emerald Ash Borer (EAB) 9. know it is almost certain that that large quantities of privately owned trees will be destroyed as the EAB infestation progresses. It should be noted that once an EAB infected tree dies, they become immediate liability risks as they tend to break and fall over from the base of the tree at ground level. A thorough public education and awareness of EAB and its implications is highly recommended through all means possible. With this latest information on the spread of EAB, there now appears to be a definite need for the City to act immediately on this situation by developing a management strategy to deal with Ash trees owned by the municipality. Listed below are a number of example strategies that can be considered in managing EAB. EAB Strategy No.1 Strategy No. 1 would be to simply permit EAB to run its course, taking no pro-active action in the treatment or control of the insect. This approach will result in the mortality of existing Ash trees over an estimated period of 5-10 years. Although there will be no costs incurred with chemical treatment there will be considerable costs associated with removal and replacement of trees including a need for additional staff and/or contract resources required to undertake and manage all aspects of this work. EAB Strategy No. 2 Strategy No. 2 would involve the City taking a proactive course of action in treating Ash trees with a diameter of greater than 20cm on our streets, estimated to be 3,000 trees. This is based on a set of criteria that other larger cities have developed. For example, the Town of Oakville have determined that healthy Ash trees greater than 20cm in calliper (dia) would be worthy of treatment on a bi-annual basis for an extended period of time, perhaps as long as 15 years. There is research out of the USA suggesting the treatment timeframe may be reduced depending on a number of factors including the lack of host trees remaining alive to support future generations of EAB. Strategy No. 2 does not include treating trees less than 20cm in diameter on streets. As such it will still be necessary to remove and replace 500 Ash trees and again this will require additional staffing resources as outline in Strategy No. 1. EAB Strategy No. 3 Strategy No. 3 would essentially mirror Strategy No. 2; however, the treatment program would be expanded to include all Ash trees less than 20cm in diameter. This strategy will be incrementally more expensive; however, significantly more trees will be retained on our streets. Over and above the added work load EAB will contribute to the Operations and Facilities Division, deceased privately owned trees could very possibly create an increased work load for our By-law enforcement section where it becomes necessary to issue removal orders under the Property Standards By-law for infractions concerning trees posing a safety hazard. March 15, 2012 Page 4 Emerald Ash Borer (EAB) 1r] Alternative(s) To the Recommendations While there are several alternatives in dealing with managing the effects of EAB, as outlined above, there are no alternatives in completely stopping the spread of the insect or the ensuing damage that will result from its presence in the municipality. Financial Implications There will be significant financial implications with this situation. The financial information contained in the following chart is based on estimates obtained from other municipalities and private contractors. The need for funds required to manage the impacts associated with EAB will be on-going for an estimated 15 years or more. It should be noted that further infestation could progress faster than anticipated and require more immediate action in the removal of infected trees to minimize liability risks. EAB Strategy Chart Strategy 1 Cost of preventative treatment (avg. $300/per tree per $0 treatment application x 7.5 applications over 15 year period) Cost of tree and stump removal (avg. $700 per tree x 3,500 $2,450,000.00 trees) Cost of tree replacement (avg. $300 per tree 3,500) $1,050,000.00 Total Cost $3,500,000.00 Strategy 2 (treatment of 3,000 trees) Cost of preventative treatment (avg. $300/per tree per $6,750,000.00 treatment application x 3,000 trees x 7.5 applications over 15 year period) Cost of tree and stump removal (avg. $700 per tree x 500 $350,000.00 trees) Cost of tree replacement (avg. $300 per tree 500 trees) $150,000.00 Total Cost $7,250,000.00 Strategy 3 (treatment of 3,500 trees) Cost of preventative treatment (avg. $300/per tree per $7,875,000.00 treatment application x 3,500 trees x 7.5 applications over 15 year period) Cost of tree and stump removal (avg. $700 per tree x 3,500 $0 trees) Cost of tree replacement (avg. $300 per tree 3,500) $0 Total Cost $7,875,000.00 Conclusions That Management receive this report as information and authorize one of the above-noted strategies in the management of the EAB situation. March 15, 2012 Page 5 Emerald Ash Borer (EAB) • City o0 Report to Executive ItlANME Report Number: CS 40-12 Date: September 10, 2012 From: Everett Buntsma Director, Community Services Subject: Continued Funding for Environmental Stewardship Pickering (ESP) - File: A-1440 Recommendation: 1. That Report CS 40-12 of the Director, Community Services regarding continued funding for Environmental Stewardship Pickering (formerly the Healthy Neighbours Program) to provide environmental leadership training, event support and volunteer opportunities be received; 2. That Council endorse continued participation in the Environmental Stewardship Pickering Program; 3. That Council consider extending the existing annual grant to Toronto and Region Conservation Authority in the amount of$25,000 for the period of 2013 - 2017 (5 year commitment) during 2013 budget deliberations; 4. That Council authorize the appropriate City officials to bring this forward in 2013. Executive Summary: Correspondence has been received from Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) outlining the Environmental Stewardship Pickering (ESP) Program, which will continue to address local environmental issues to create a sustainable Healthy Community. To participate in this initiative from 2013 - 2017 TRCA is requesting that the City contribute $25,000 annually for the upcoming 5-year period commencing in 2013. The City has contributed $25,000 annually from 2008 - 2012 (5 years) to ESP and $15,000 annually from 2005 - 2007 (3 years) to the Frenchman's Bay Watershed Rehabilitation Project. The City has been pleased with the results of the programs, and has received a positive response through community participation in the past, therefore, staff recommend the request be approved to continue to educate our residents and promote a healthy environment. Report CS 40-12 September 10, 2012 Subject: Continued Funding for Environmental Stewardship Pickering Page 2 Financial Implications: TRCA has requested continued funding in the amount of $25,000 annually from 2013 —2017 (five years). The total funding amount is $125,000. The funding will continue to be reflected in the budget as 2195 (Grants to Organizations & Individuals), 2712 (Culture & Recreation). Discussion: Environmental Stewardship Pickering (ESP) is a collaborative community committee that works together to organize environmental events and activities to provide leadership, support and build awareness of environmental stewardship within Pickering. The ESP partnership includes the in-kind and financial support of the City of Pickering, the Ajax-Pickering Board of Trade, Durham Sustain Ability, Ontario Power Generation, Pickering East Shore Community Association, Toronto and Region Conservation Authority and Pickering residents. Since 2008, ESP has held or collaborated on 60 events in Pickering. These events have engaged more than 5,200 residents in hands-on environmental initiatives. Highlights from the past 5 years include: • The creation of the Environmental Leadership Forum, an annual event to assist participants in achieving their environmental goals by providing training and educational sessions. • The annual Environmental Volunteer Expo, which showcases the environmental initiatives happening in the City of Pickering, and connects potential volunteers with those in need of volunteers. • The 2011 ESP Annual report (attached), which summarizes ESP's accomplishments, including the Bicentennial Butterfly Festival among the events hosted. In addition to providing a variety of quality environmental programming to the residents of Pickering, ESP programs support several of the indicators for sustainability included in the Measuring Sustainability Report. These include: • Assisting with increasing the tree canopy and percentage of natural cover within Pickering through community tree plantings. • Increasing watershed biodiversity by working to replace invasive non-native plants with native plants, and promoting the health and diversity of terrestrial plants and animals by providing environmental education programs to students, residents and community organizations. CORP0227-07/01 revised Rieport CS 40-12 September 10, 2012 Subject: Continued Funding for Environmental Stewardship Pickering Page 3 • Improving the health of Frenchman's Bay by providing habitat for wildlife through the installation of song bird boxes, toad houses and shelter for native bees. ESP has had many successes over the past five years, and it is the objective of the committee to continue on with the existing programming. In addition, ESP will work with City staff to implement new initiatives, where appropriate. These include and are not limited to; supporting the implementation of the Urban Forest Strategy, assisting with promoting the significance of the Emerald Ash Borer, and supporting the Measuring Sustainability Report with appropriate activities. Work plan for 2013 — 2018 • Host annual Environmental Leadership Forum and Environmental Volunteer Expo. • Change behaviours, by providing 20 lawn and garden workshops, equipping residents with the knowledge to practice organic lawn care and incorporate native plants into their gardens. • Plant native trees, shrubs and wildflowers at 15 community events. • Support local groups, schools and residents by assisting them with achieving their environmental goals. • Engage 5,000 residents in hands-on environmental initiatives. • Prepare and distribute e-newsletters and annual report. To help accomplish the goals of Environmental Stewardship Pickering, and meet the expanding needs of the community, a sponsorship package and donation form has been created. The objective is to match funding from the City of Pickering with funding from private sources. Attachments: 1. TRCA request 2. Environmental Stewardship Pickering, 2011 Annual Report CORP0227-07/01 revised Report CS 40-12 September 10, 2012 (. 7 Subject: Continued Funding for Environmental Stewardship L v Pickering Page 4 Prepared By: Approved/Endorsed By: . 141(alb/ 16,i. ,. f• ichelle Pearce Ever untsma Coordinator, Director, Community Services Environmental Awareness Programs MP:mp Attachments Recommended for the consideration of Pickering Cit Council y • z , zo r2, Lj..416j11 Tony Prevedel, P.Eng. Chief Administrative Officer . CORP0227-07/01 revised �; , TORONTO AND REGION"Y, onserva t1 on Community Services for The Living City FILENO.D JUL 2019 July 4, 2012 ABEY.TO 0 FWD ❑COPY 0 CIRCULATE MAYOR COUNCIL Mr. Everett Buntsma CAO CLERK Director of Operations and Emergency Services CUL&AEC CORP SERVICES City of Pickering ENG SERVICES HUMAN RESOURCES OPS CENTRE LEGAL One the Esplanade FAC OPERATIOPS OFFICE SUSTAIN Pickering, Ontario L1V 6K7 FIRE PLAN&DEV Dear Mr. Buntsma: Re: Environmental Stewardship Pickering--Financial Support 2013-2018 For the past five years, the City of Pickering has generously supported Environmental Stewardship Pickering (ESP) in their broader community initiatives. As a committee we work towards building capacity in the community and ensuring that residents get correct information regarding our collective environmentally responsibilities. Your financial support has provided Pickering residents with leadership training, event support and numerous volunteer opportunities. Since 2008, ESP has held or collaborated on 60 events in the Pickering area. These events have engaged more than 5200 residents in hands-on environmental initiatives. Highlights from the past 5 years include: • The Environmental Leadership Forum, an annual event to assist participants in achieving their environmental goals by providing training and educational sessions; •. The annual Environmental Volunteer Expo,which showcases the environmental initiatives happening in the City of Pickering and connects potential volunteers with those in need of volunteers; and • Our 2011 Annual Report(enclosed),which summarizes our accomplishments, including the Bicentennial Butterfly Festival among the events hosted. To continue this success,Toronto and Region Conservation,on behalf of the Environmental Stewardship Pickering committee,would like to request continued financial support of$25,000 per year over the next five years from the City of Pickering. As ESP continues to grow and bring innovative environmental experiences to the community,the need for financial resources also grows. To help accomplish our goals and meet our expanding needs, we have created a sponsorship package and donation form to match our municipal funding support with private sources. The goal for 2013 is to use the sponsor and donor opportunities to match the City of Pickering's requested contribution. .../2 Member of Conservation Ontario 5 Shoreham Drive, Downsview, Ontario M3N 1 S4 (416) 661-6600 FAX 661-6898 www.trca.on.ca .� -2- 9 ,If you feel it is appropriate,we would be honoured to update the City of Pickering, Mayor and members of Council at a meeting this fall regarding our collective success stories and our plans for future community engagement and fundraising. We look forward to confirming your financial commitment into 2013 and confirming our opportunity to present our ESP program to Pickering Council. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact myself or Mary Williams at 416-661-6600 ext. 5753. Sincerely, .anne Jeffer Manager, Stewardship and Outre. Education Toronto and Region Conservation 416-661-6600 ext. 5638 Cc. Adele Freeman, Director,Watershed Management Division,TRCA Environmental Stewardship Pickering Committee Members. Enclosure • lr ENVIRONMENTAL STEWARDSHIP plc: KERING k - --r: pp Y `"'TT ,5� h"` ji "fir ^m } V dr scl V , F. F Welcome ',,, 3,d Annual Ervironrnent&l ,. Leaders! forum Dave Johnson "S Environmental.Stewardship Pickering is a collaborative community committee that hosts environmental events in the City of Pickering. This Environmental Stewardship annual report outlines our events throughout 2011. We actively Pickering engaged over 1,400 local residents in 18 environmental activities. II 11 Environmental Stewardship Pickering Environment Stewardship Pickering A[1 G1 AL REPORT Environmental Stewardship Pickering (ESP) is a collaborative committee that works together with the community to organize environmental events and activities. These events and activities provide leadership, support and build awareness of environmental stewardship in the City of Pickering. Our ESP partnership includes the in-kind and financial support of the Ajax-Pickering Board of Trade, City of Pickering, Durham Sustain Ability (DSA), Ontario Power Generation (OPG), Pickering East Shore Community Association (PESCA), Toronto and Region Conservation (TRCA) and Pickering residents. Throughout 2011, Environmental Stewardship Pickering organized and participated in 18 events and engaged 1412 local residents. Highlights include the 3rd Annual Environmental Leadership Forum, the 2nd Annual Environmental Volunteer Expo and the Bicentennial Butterfly Festival. Events and Activities Pickering Seedy Saturday—February 5'h, 2011 This is an annual event hosted by the Pickering Museum Village Bloomers and Britches Gardening Club. ESP representatives set up a display to share information about gardening with native plants, pesticide free lawn care, and gardening to attract birds. Participating in the event provided a great opportunity to connect with the 80 participants who were actively engaged at our booth and share information about upcoming ESP events. 3'd Annual Environmental Leadership Forum -March 5'h, 2011 ESP hosts an annual Environmental Leadership Forum each spring. The purpose of the forum is to get the residents of Pickering involved and informed about environmental initiatives in their neighbourhood. In 2011, we had 87 participants attend the forum, which was our maximum registration. Steve Hounsell, of the Ontario Biodiversity Council, was the keynote speaker. He presented on the "State of Biodiversity: A Call for Action." The participants then attended • morning and afternoon breakout sessions. The sessions included: • Native Birds of Prey —Wild Ontario • Monitoring Urban Forests —Toronto and Region Conservation • Native Bees and their Habitats—York University • Play and Learning in the Outdoor Classroom — Evergreen • Tree Identification and Maintenance— Local Enhancement and Appreciation of Forests (LEAF) • Native Wildflowers and Invasive Species—Grow Wild! • Lake Ontario Atlantic Salmon Restoration Program—Ontario Federation of Anglers and • Hunters Page 1 .." - ,•-,., •' • -• . ='- '.-:•,:•..is.;.},-.,.,:'•27-.':--st "v•' - '• " ,... • .-.. •-, ,, Environmental Stewardship Pickering '.------..•e-,-,7:'7 _ -.V4V, 'ft . , .. '''.,7_-'''.........;,-1,:;.-a■••69. :A•41'.i4 :;•;-----•-..... •=....?.="2".•••••:•;i","•••••• ,..4.4441111141111 .........-- - ----••"• ... - '11 'Al•,••.• ' . • • •- ' •:: ,: .-'....* . '',;•,,tz-LA 1 ik, ,., , A ;•Z••••••■ ,l,,,-,e. 1,..._ . " f%.• py, , .4. , 1- 0/1 t -■... .} ,,,• ''. im• ,zi.c.,• - s ' ,- -,•alf_.„.." il : •uli s '.' ,!,-,--Y:\:-..,,,. .;,-;,..,.• -,,:4, - - Ai_ v -1"0';',"--- "':-. rr•-•• ' C.‘. • -- --..z. ,••.... ... ' ' ----. --•• -'`-..,, - -.)S ., '- t.;--- __:-- S ,-,.:: 'e.,:::4,-,-2.----,,„_ - '•-• . .1 • ' ilp t — ; f l'—'‘. 4 ,, ki,..„. "'if':.-4 Ictit.H..,,,`--.:,1 •:•lit _. 4 -1-yjii _........ i,, ,, •,„ ,_ ..- ? .,_ ...„ tAl_„._ e_‘"$ ;' 1°.-',.f•'I '- , 4 :1,s:: ,-1 . . . -4,,,,.Ta . --,'',.,..t.• '. - ..••:!lk*, , ,tA.:■•.:".• ' ' 4 1 :4” 1 --.4*....'.. :4!::kii. •"•,.:,•••:•,...t..__„j/kS,4_,''''',74. 4 •• . "t ,,! • • Dave Johnson ,:Ap---!;er 1-=';... o, - 2.-- ,,- ,..........04`. ._-....,.%! - °- /,' -..- /...s...;:,:_t134,• :,...7.--. ,..r., ':.;ir 3',,- , '-.:.-- i - .i' `, •'1.1•.'-----ittc- •-...... .,." -- ,, Nik,' -..41"--0-' -.• ..-.--:.-,• ::::. ' -...7:-.-.-. -".--..:-..-- ...,.:,•• ,. ',.,t.\::■.1, - --.‘'' ------.- to•., = ..:'.:'\:-.,-;; ' .-7,''''.;•'-'V ' 4,... ,o,2"—..:—:-...,.....-:....0,S...',,--74`17•-0; ....;.:-,,,,.....- - ---;.. ' - ' `,",--..---*-rt'-,z--;:"-,' , -:- ' •-•"" '''',1",-)*:"e•-14 ''-• --. . to.- --.:-F.:r...-'-- . \-/,$.1'1f4•A'-' ' . .Y i '..• .-4,,....-....tP . .. it,t, - .,-tf ./#. •-•"*. T.',.,• - '- ,-,:•-:---..-, ; ,-,1 ,-.11••4 fe•=e;'',,?;'. 1--.-1.41A14.• -2', ; .' . . ,.,t,,N ,. .... it i „.... 4. -V- '''''''',': .. -:. , •i. ohnson _46,,p, ..„, ' `'„"-''••_•'::',,. .'L.'''. r,• 4.4' . .--:.,,, - ‘,.• A'Welcome -, .....— . •- , . . , 1 :.!. ;F-.11 3'd Annual ,-.i.g - ''4.f• ;"'''-. Environmental t::...,;:: , M I rj Leadership 1,,,,,,,, '-;11- - , , _4.., .. 777 ,.,,...s- lir , • • : t, 1 . , .• _ .,„....„ .,.. , I 1 7E1 it, i - • . 1• , - L • , : ,. ri W Ir---i I te•! ' "-- , --„, .. ..... r . r , "I' , .':.' . ts,?.• . ,A.,.... .3, . 1 ,--.4,,,- 4. Dave Johnson :- / /-.....,4 I 04‘":4jil. f: , ' 'i/ etf-Ni sot' iii *' ' ..z, .........,...,,, ..‘ , A. ', r .1, , i /...- '''.:14(410-:1. / ..--, - .--- Dave John risa .. .. . . _ . . . . . . .. _ . . , Page 2 • , • Environmental Stewardship Pickering Pollinator Workshop—April 4th, 2011 A presentation was made to the 47'h Pickering Guides. The purpose was to teach the guides about native bees and other pollinators. After the presentation, the Guides made native bee habitat structures to install in their backyards. Twenty-nine Girl Guides participated in the presentation and activity. Seaton Trail Hike with Hillside Outdoor Education Centre—April 19'h, 2011 An Earth Day public hike was developed and led in collaboration with the Hillside Outdoor Education Centre. Heritage Park Public School attended the hike, which took place along the Seaton Trail. The group also made bee nesting habitat structures that were installed along the trail during the hike. Twenty-eight students and four adults took part. Vertical Vegetables Workshop—April 26'h, 2011 Ken Brown is a local gardener with a passion for gardening. During his workshop, Vertical Vegetables, he inspired residents to grow non-typical vegetable gardens in small spaces, even including in pots on a veranda. Participants learned that gardening is accessible for everyone— from a suburban home-owner to an apartment dweller. This was a very popular workshop,with 54 participants. Gorgeous Garden Workshop—May 5th, 2011 The Gorgeous Garden workshop focused on native wildflowers and how to use them in the backyard. Lorraine Johnson was the presenter and instructed participants on the benefits of native plants and how to choose the best plants for your soil type and conditions. Lorraine is a local speaker who has written many books including, 100 Easy-to-Grow Native Plants. Thirty-six people attended the workshop, which was held at the Petticoat Creek Community Centre. Lush Lawn Workshop—May 14'h, 2011 Cathy Wall, the Product Manager at Quality Seeds in Vaughan, is an expert on creating lush lawns the natural way. She led workshop participants through the types of native grass seed that would produce healthier, more eco-friendly lawns. She also discussed how to deter pests naturally. Thirty participants came out to the Pickering Recreation Complex to take part. Take Pride in Pickering —April 30'h, 2011 Each spring, Ontario Power Generation, City of Pickering and Toronto and Region Conservation organize Take Pride in Pickering Day. This year's event was a tree planting at Alex Robertson Park, helping to naturalize the area around Hydro Marsh. ESP contributed to the purchasing of native trees. The City of Pickering provided a commemorative oak tree to celebrate Pickering's 200th Anniversary. Over 250 volunteers planted 650 trees and shrubs, which was a great turnout to help put so many trees in the ground. Page 3 . Environmental Stewardship Pickering Dunbarton Pollinator Garden Planting—May 10th, 2011 A pollinator garden was established as part of the outdoor classroom at Dunbarton High School. The Environmental Club and two very active teachers helped with the planning and execution of the garden. There were 25 shrubs and 60 native plants provided by ESP and 100 other plants donated from community members. Fifteen students and eight parents/teachers volunteered their time to put the plants in the ground. The Dunbarton High School students and teacher are planning on expanding the garden in spring 2012. Western Gateway Planting—June 8th, 2011. In early June, the City of Pickering and TRCA hosted a tree planting event at the Western Gateway on Bella Vista Drive as part of Rouge Days. Rouge Days is a compilation of several different events held around the Rouge watershed that celebrate this special region. The Western Gateway is one of the only easily accessible areas of the Rouge in Pickering, so it was the perfect location to get a school group involved in the Rouge Days celebrations. The Grade 5 and 6 classes from Rosebank Road Public School walked to the park and planted 80 native trees and shrubs. Tuesdays on the Trail: The Pollinators!—July 5th, 2011 This very popular summer program is organized by OPG as a way to get local children involved in different educational activities during the summer. Toronto and Region Conservation has collaborated with OPG on this event for six years. This Tuesday on the Trail activity focused on identifying local pollinators. It was held at Alex Robertson Park. There were 250 children that took part, the most participants to date for this event. Tuesdays on the Trail: Animal Candid Camera—August 9th, 2011 The second Tuesdays on the Trail was a children's photography program. The participants were taught basic camera techniques and learned about the different animals they might find in the park. The 24 participants were then given disposable cameras and asked to do a scavenger hunt around Alex Robertson Park. Page 4 x Environmental Stewardship Pickering 2. 'F Bicentennial Butterfly Festival—September 10th, 2011 a• To celebrate the City of Pickering's Bicentennial year, a festival to educate residents about butterflies and pollinators was organized. To commemorate the occasion, 200 monarch butterflies were released at Alex Robertson Park. Approximately 100 of the released monarchs were tagged as part of the Monarch Watch Program. There were 210 people in attendance, which exceeded our participation expectations. Other activities included: o Butterfly tagging .... • o Wildflower planting o Native bee habitat structure building , o Seed paper painting ` •F �K o Face painting o First Nation Butterfly Dance demonstration , ,,• ,L , ,L ,,. ,. ,,,,,., ..,,,,. ::::,.,•,...,.,,,....,-..-!..........i.......,..,:r..,:::y-,..,:.:,:ii:•.:,:: ift � '�•�� �r� " • y am st at� r�' ta i •�� ,.a.. •_ gam/ W M.q j. E a �, ' `� `. c . Dave John`.6i: p f •� 7 sT�► +. °r.e +�kr rr ^,:..4' - _ +''fit 14 s 4 �.+.t. ' a 'Ir "� ., r.''',r. 7a ' i• .5 x / c .`..�. &1 4 . ,y ..,.. 1 . r • Dade.. ' 8 *� g * e s p t' . i.''1!r *hi�! L s.S.•{` �,,.,r,; tt w 0 4 rn '" Sala 0'.� . '' I•1i 6 M � t e3``c:iroil ,zi.jed,��1'ii `,ys a�r*a�a . '�r''i • �< .:r •'i 4 ,i, `- - '...-s. ar S i NA,',> is : _.," • • i ,'rt _t •!,. 1-[ £tt$a 4 ;51 f; it.4.(.{.) !it I - t' 1.4 ! .L' it ;-,.i:,.- h f ty^r F t .'r tl[ .,(,:,.r ,F • T-i4 1' Lit 1 . 6 7 I ✓' s'.",• ,4 nyyt , 1.. \i.,lit et..;,':: le..■.,'.'.' . ''. . '.. '...' ft. ,..,,,:,,i,-, ...,. 14..,2r4,:,- . Page 5 'Environmental Stewardship Pickering Great Canadian Shoreline Clean-up—September 171h, 2011 This event is a national clean-up effort that is organized by the Vancouver Aquarium. Every year during the third week in September, groups and volunteers are encouraged to clean-up one of their local shorelines. The 2011 site that was chosen was Rotary Frenchman's Bay West Park at • the south end of West Shore Boulevard in Pickering. There were 22 participants who collected 15 bags of garbage. Some interesting items that were found by the volunteers included: a coconut, plastic lawn chairs and a toothbrush. . r,..', :. 'x „+ 1 ‘, 1) F {$ a Y V 1 r ; ,-` , . a f • r }r s , A ,7i ' . ; ,..4.1 r.,. fir « $'- _ v ' ' ' r ,6f ltich tip - •y ,,, -- 4,, ,-‘i -K�-rn ...-a_ � -rte• !. <I l 4• . it . ..--. : . , , 7. ,,i. -. Page 6 .S. . ` ' _ Environmental Stewardship Pickering Gorgeous Gardens: Fall Edition Workshop—September 28'h, 2011 The fall edition of the Gorgeous Gardens workshop focused on how to put your garden to bed for the winter. An awards ceremony for the City of Pickering's Pickering Blooms gardening program was also held. Ken Brown, a local gardener, presented actions that residents could take before the winter to have a productive spring garden. In the second half of the workshop, Ken talked about the award winning Pickering Blooms gardens. Awards were handed out to the winners. This event was well attended with 56 participants. Take Pride in Pickering —October 15th, 2011 This was the second Take Pride in Pickering tree planting event at Alex Robertson Park in 2011. There were 650 trees and shrubs planted in the south end of the park to extend the naturalized space in that area. One hundred and twenty volunteers attended, which included local scouts groups and Pickering residents. ESP Round Table—November 5th, 2011 ; 1`°' To help encourage networking and discussions .� a '1 between Pickering environmental groups, ESP organized a round table event. The 13 + -- participants included the exhibitors/organizations that were hosting displays at the Environmental =� Volunteer Expo. The ideas and concepts from the round table will be taken into consideration for ' 2012 ESP events and activities. " D,,?ve Johnson • Environmental Volunteer Expo— November 5th, 2011 The second Environmental Volunteer - Expo changed locations this year to s L , Petticoat Creek Community Centre , " f3 and brought out 54 participants. This event is a networking event that ` ; • brings together local organizations . ,t F,; who are looking for volunteers to I. , t # ' F } assist with their events and activities. ^ 1a_. The Expo showcases these 4'44:7 E _ ! organizations and connects the # r• public with the environmental volunteer opportunities that they offer in the Pickering community. Thirteen organizations exhibited •, volunteer opportunities. Due to participant feedback, the next Davedinson • volunteer expo will be held in the spring of 201 3. Page 7 i:nvironmental Stewardship Pickering ✓ Event Summary Event Location Date Participants Pickering Seedy Saturday Pickering Recreation Complex February 5th 80 3rd Annual Environmental Pickering Civic Complex March 5th 87 Leadership Forum 47th Pickering Guides St. Elizabeth Seton Catholic April 4th 29 Pollinator Workshop School Seaton Trail Hike Seaton Trail April 19th 32 Vertical Vegetables East Shore Community Centre April 26th 54 Take Pride in Pickering Alex Robertson Park April 30th 250 Gorgeous Gardens Petticoat.Creek Community May 5th 56 Centre Dunbarton Pollinator Plant Dunbarton High School May 10th 23 Garden Planting Lush Lawn Workshop Pickering Recreation Complex May 14th 30 Western Gateway Planting Bella Vista Drive June 8th 22 Tuesdays on the Trail: The Alex Robertson Park July 5th 250 Pollinators! Tuesdays on the Trail: Alex Robertson Park August 9th 24 Animal Candid Camera Bicentennial Butterfly Festival Alex Robertson Park September 10th 210 Great Canadian Shoreline Rotary Frenchman's Bay West September 17th 22 Clean-up Park Gorgeous Garden: Fall Pickering Civic Complex September 28th 56 Edition Workshop • Take Pride in Pickering Alex Robertson Park October 15th 120 ESP Round Table Petticoat Creek Community November 5th 13 Centre Environmental Volunteer Expo Petticoat Creek Community November 5th 54 Centre Total Number of 1412 Participants Page 8 city co A Report to — Executive Committee •PICKERING Report Number: CS 41-12 Date: September 10, 2012 From: Everett Buntsma Director, Community Services Subject: Tender No. T-16-2012 - Dixie Road Streetlight Replacement - File: A-1440 Recommendation: 1. That Report CS 41-12 of the Director, Community Services regarding the tender for the Dixie Road Streetlight Replacement project be received; 2. That Tender No.T-16-2012 submitted by Fellmore Electrical, in the amount of $162,656.32 (HST included), be accepted; 3. That the total gross project cost of $221,416.32 (HST included), including the tender amount and other associated costs, and the total net project cost of $199,392.25 (net of HST rebate) be approved; 4. That Council authorize the Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer to increase the finance from the Federal Gas Tax, as provided for in the 2011 approved Streetlight Capital Budget from $90,000.00 to $199,392.25; and 5. That the appropriate City of Pickering officials be authorized to take necessary action to give effect thereto. Executive Summary: Within the 2011 Streetlights Capital Budget, Dixie Road Streetlight Replacement was approved as a project due to the hydro pole replacement and relocation being undertaken by Veridian Connections. The City hired NEXGEN UTILITIES to undertake detail design in coordination with Veridian's work. As the City is replacing the existing high pressure sodium lights with energy efficient LED lights, the project is eligible for Federal Gas Tax funding. As this will be the City's pilot project for LED streetlights, efficiencies or savings will be determined and evaluated over the next year. The low bid submitted by Fellmore Electrical in the amount of$162,656.32 (HST included), and a net project cost of$199,392.25 (net of HST rebate) is recommended for approval. • Report CS 41-12 September 10, 2012 Subject: Tender No. T-16-2012 Dixie Road Streetlight Replacement Page. 2 Financial Implications: 1. Tender Amount Tender No. T-16-2012 $143,943.65 HST (13%) 18,712.67 Total Gross Amount $162,656.32 2. Estimated Project Costing Summary Tender No. T-16-2012 Dixie Road Streetlight Replacement $143,943.65 Miscellaneous Costs 5,000.00 Consultant Fees (NEXGEN UTILITIES) 30,000.00 Contingency 17,000.00 Sub Total — Costs 195,943.65 HST (13%) 25,472.67 Total Gross Project Costs 221,416.32 HST Rebate (11.24%) (22,024.07) Total Net Project Costs $199,392.25 3. Source of Funds Roads Capital Budget Account Code Budget Required 5325.1101.6181 $90,000.00 $199,392.25 Net Project Costs (over) under Approved Funds ($109,392.25) The over-expenditure was due to current market value for a project of this nature being higher than originally budgeted in 2011. This over-expenditure in the amount of$109,392.25 will be funded from the same source of funds as approved in the 2011 Capital Budget. The Dixie Road Streetlight Replacement project includes the introduction of LED technology which will result in energy savings and is therefore, deemed eligible for Federal Gas Tax funding. Discussion: As part of the 2011 Streetlight Capital Budget, Dixie Road Streetlight Replacement was approved as a construction project. This project was initiated as a result of Veridian Connections advising the City in 2010 that they were CORP0227-07/01 revised Report CS 41-12 September 10, 2012 7. 7 Subject: Tender No. T-16-2012 Dixie Road Streetlight Replacement Page 3 relocating their pole line on Dixie Road. Veridian advised the City that we would have to make arrangements to complete a streetlight design for Veridian's review and approval for the transfer of the existing streetlights or for the installation of new streetlights on the new poles. The City deemed this as an opportunity as a pilot project to replace existing high pressure sodium streetlights with the new energy efficient LED streetlight technology. The City hired an electrical consultant, NEXGEN UTILITIES, to undertake the detail design and preparation of the tender documents. NEXGEN completed a review of luminaries for Dixie Road between Finch Avenue and Kingston Road. NEXGEN tested several different high performance LED fixtures with many different variations such as the number of LED's, drive current and different distribution types. The main fixtures that were tested are: • Holophane (Acuity Lighting) with the LEDgend model; • Cooper Lighting with the Ventus model; • Lumec (Philips) with the Roadsta model; • Luxlite with their induction cobrahead. NEXGEN found that the road was very difficult to light properly due to the road classification Arterial Class C with medium pedestrian conflict. Typically, a road like this would require lighting in a staggered configuration from both sides of the road. However, installing lights on both sides of the road would cost several times more because it would be necessary to over-dig the existing boulevard, install road crossing ducts by directional bore under Dixie Road, and would require additional poles. NEXGEN `s recommendation was the Ventus fixture by Cooper Lighting solely because it is the only fixture that meets the IESNA (Illuminating Engineering Society North America) recommended practice for both the roadway and sidewalk illumination. Tender No. T-16-2012 was issued on Friday, July 27, 2012 and closed on Wednesday, August 15, 2012. Six bidders responded of which five bidders submitted a tender for this project and one was unable to bid. The following documents have been reviewed by the Coordinator, Health & Safety and deemed acceptable: • Health & Safety Policy • Current WSIB Workplace Injury Summary Report • Certificate of Clearance issued by Workplace Safety & Insurance Board • Certificates of Qualification The Certificate of insurance has been reviewed by the Manager, Finance & Taxation and deemed acceptable. CORP0227-07/01 revised Report CS 41-12 September 10, 2012 Subject: Tender No. T-16-2012 Dixie Road Streetlight Replacement Page 4 • Fellmore Electrical's references have been checked and are deemed acceptable by the Supervisor, Engineering & Capital Works. In conjunction with staffs review of the contractor's previous work experience with the City of Pickering the tender is deemed acceptable. Upon careful examination of all tenders and relevant documents received, the Community Services Department, Engineering Services Division recommends acceptance of the low bid submitted by Fellmore Electric, for Tender No. T-16-2012 in the amount $162,656.32 (HST included) and that the total net project cost of $199,392.25 be approved. Attachments: • 1. Supply & Services Memorandum dated August 15, 2012. 2. Location Map Prepared By: Approved/Endorsed By: D re Selsk , C`-T, C�M III 1' Everett B tsm PD, CMM Y �/ Supervisor, Engineering & Capital Works Director, Community Services Caryn Kong, CGA Gillis Paterson, CMA Senior Financial Analyst Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer Capital Debt Management • • era A. Fe g= acher CSCMP, CR 0, CPPB, C.P.M., CMMIII Manager, Supply & Services CORP0227-07/01 revised • • Report CS 41-12 September 10, 2012 Subject: Tender No. T-16-2012 Dixie Road Streetlight Replacement Page 5 1,,- ----) 1 _ ( , • _di , Richa d W. Hoporn, P. Eng. Divi ' n Head, Engineering Services DS:ds Recommended for the consideration of Pickering ity Council Tony Prevedel, P.Eng. Chief Administrative Officer CORP0227-07/01 revised 4 Cliff 114 ,111m, .4141 PICKERING • Memo To: Richard Holborn August 15, 2012 Division Head, Engineering Services From: Vera A. Felgemacher Manager, Supply & Services Copy: Supervisor, Engineering & Capital Works • Subject: Tender No. T-16-2012 Tender for Street Light Replacements — Dixie Road File: F-5400-001 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 for the above mentioned tender. Six (6) bidders responded of which five (5) bidders submitted a tender for this project. 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 13.03 (r) provides checking tendered unit prices and extensions unit prices shall govern and extensions will be corrected accordingly, which has been done. All deposits other than the low three bidders may be returned to the applicable bidders as provided for by Purchasing Procedure No. PUR 010-001, Item 13.03(w). Three (3) bids have been retained for review at this time. Copies of the tenders are attached for your review along with the summary of costs. SUMMARY HST Included Bidder Total Tendered After Calculation Check Amount Fellmore Electrical $162,656.32 $162,656.32 Langley Utilities Contracting Ltd. $176,543.29 $176,543.29 Stacey Electric Company Ltd. $188,373.83 $188,373.83 Otonabee Electrical Services Ltd. $197,378.80 $197,378.80 Black & McDonald Ltd. $201,118.34 $201,118.34 Rand Electric Unable to Bid i ...:., -. t-../o17 '/G-, Pursuant to Information to Bidders Item 28, the following will be requested of the low bidder for your review during the evaluation stage of this tender call. Please advise when you wish us to proceed with this task. 'T i (a) A copy of the Health and Safety Policy to be used on this project (currently dated and signed); (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 Certificate of Clearance 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) a copy of a valid Ontario Electrical Contractor Licence issued by the Electrical Contractors Registration Agency of the Electrical Safety Association( ECRA/ESA) and copies of valid Licenses for all Master Electricians who will be assigned to this project; (f) a copy of valid certificates of qualifications issued by the Ontario Ministry of Training, Colleges and Universities for all of the company's Journeyman Electricians and Powerline Technicians who will be assigned to this project; (g) list of Sub-Contractors in accordance with General Conditions Item 32; and (h) Waste Management Plan to be used on this project in accordance with Tendering Specifications Item 18. Please include the following items in your Report to Council: (a) if items (a) through (f) noted above, are acceptable to the Co-ordinator, Health & Safety; (b) if item (d) - Insurance - is acceptable to the Manager, Finance &Taxation; (c) any past work experience with the low bidder Fellmore Electrical 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; and (i) 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. If ` ou require further information, please feel free to contact me or a member of Supply & Se ices. V F^' Attachments August 15, 2012 Tender No. T-16-2012 Page 2 Tender for Street Light Replacements - Dixie Road I4-I cu to z 1 W a U c m U i: a) CL a U co N c X ca CA M ,q.. N I h a -a N 0o r "1 to o a a ;� "� QA K c a\ : o c m E E N 'Z A ° E . nz 3 ~ ,o ` ■ n1 ■ N. m E Q �E' ER fR ER ER ER O I W Y W c c m CO I E N E d r U a p CU N 1 d o - C .. o Q s N I ~ m 1 \ \ \ o Z c) C W 7 = o d J ~ O a a - O C o c CO 13 13 0 0 ~ 4 m m 1Z tic . I 0 � \ \ • p a)a O o uc - cc ti c a a) c a rn N E T3 O N C N a) , - CB r 71)-- ci z -a mci C C J a) O > c > L ( U m c W' 45 co U > A '6 o - W oNpl, • ro 1.L. O -J U) CC U 41 PORT# L"''1 City o0 I 1,:,_. ;fAw _ T S IG 11 sT1 1cit�'_ ION_ N V[ ENGINEERING SERVICES DIVISION Attachment for Tender T-16-2012 w ' ELO OVNCANNpN ORivE A Lp0E5T ER WORTH U �LW"�v�pRE ` ROSEOPO Ti '- CES. G gT W w SOU ENT �;'^�� jTh S m CRACTON .0„.-- U ORESC \ PR ? U �A 71 / , 1. Z \ /SOU ` j >ou:: Jv N � O O MOUNTCASTLE A cc U c',...,, OUGN p / /�F O O PPOGE" ci, 0R P"p5 V 1y`r[v ; W\\CRESCE J U O WQ ` OpwR O U mp (REDB■RO r,a" \,BOG ,1 N U N OZ \y\' O W JJ ppt UPRE Y� E pQ, m J (\ 4 W b ' N \ ''''' 2 5% O\F� C 1 p J 2 O 5 S/`/O\\/)' J � N mO.-z.,CRESCENT �( j YW ��F�O mU J mW l a m w wC FO ! a ��O m 7 fR ORVyE RO C' w J S CLENANNA j � O _ W Q N J 2 �" Q oO p f G 0L/U� 16 "4°L O��\^\1 tt V Oy N w C2 9\ \ '. A cRESC� Co O \ 17:f)Z % // �\):54:1 m ma2ao �o m �o ws J W m t G , w O E 7O U „,',: 11 O P� 4 Yd Jp{P W W 7 '41, , "UE '� 0 U m \ / / ,6' 0 4 P E ' O GREpSR l LRn5,\ o-?G Ya1 \ i N Z U Ou PS N\\/� 3t �' y10� `M \ RES///5 O \�4 / �\°�,� �� y.. � o�' SUBJECT o o� s , -- c { AREA i A° , GosToo 9. v 7,e,%.-• R ° /\RESGROGE 0 u o T Location Map — Dixie Road Proposed Construction Includes: Dixie Road —The proposed works to include the design and installation of streetlights on Dixie Road from Kingston Road to Finch Avenue in conjunction with reconstruction/ relocation of Veridian hydro line. C400 : Report to -- =�� Executive Committee at Report Number: CS 43-12 4 Date: September 10, 2012 From: Everett Buntsma Director, Community Services Subject: Pickering Recreation Complex Arena Concession Licence Agreement - Request for Proposal No. RFP-5-2012 - File: A-1440 • Recommendation: 1. That Report CS 43-12 of the Director, Community Services regarding the Pickering Recreation Complex Arena Concession Licence Agreement be received; 2. That RFP-5-2012 submitted by Recreation Leisure Services Ltd. to operate the concession facility at Pickering Recreation Complex Arena be accepted; 3. That the Mayor and the City Clerk be authorized to execute a Concession Licence Agreement to permit the Recreation Leisure Services Ltd. to operate the concession facility at Pickering Recreation Complex Arena from September 1, 2012 to April 30, 2015 that is in the form and substance acceptable to the Director, Community Services and the City Solicitor. Executive Summary: A Concession Operator is required for the Pickering Recreation Complex Arena concession facility beginning September 2012. The former licence agreement for the Pickering Recreation Complex Arena concession facility has expired. Request for Proposal No. RFP-5-12 was posted on the City's website and one proposal was received by the closing date and time. The proposal from Recreation . • Leisure Services Ltd. received a satisfactory evaluation and references have been checked and are deemed acceptable. • The Community Services Department recommend that a concession licence agreement be initiated with Recreation Leisure Services Ltd. for a 3 year term beginning September 1, 2012 and ending April 30, 2015. Financial Implications: The revenue to be generated from this licence agreement is $2,000 annually (including HST) with equal payments at the first of each month made payable to the City of Pickering in the amount of$250 (including HST) for 8 months from September 1 to April 30 each year for the period 2012 to 2015 inclusive. Report CS 43-12 September 10, 2012 Subject: Pickering Recreation Complex Concession Page 2 Licence Agreement f E The City of Pickering 2012 approved budget for Recreation Complex Concession Agreement reflected in account 5735.9915.0000 is $2,000. Discussion: The Pickering Recreation Complex features a concession facility. The season of operation is September to April each year and a concessions operator is required beginning with the September 2012 arena season. Request for Proposal No. RFP-5-12 was prepared-and posted on the City's website. One proposal was received by the closing date and time. Recreation Leisure Services Ltd. is the single highest ranking proponent for the Pickering Recreation Complex Arena. The proposal from Recreation Leisure Services Ltd. was reviewed by the Evaluation.Committee and received a satisfactory evaluation. References provided by Recreation Leisure Services Ltd. have been checked and are deemed acceptable. The Health & Safety Policy, a current WSIB Workplace Injury Summary Report and Clearance Certificate issued by Workplace Safety and Insurance Board (WSIB) as submitted by Recreation Leisure Services Ltd. have been reviewed by the Coordinator, Health & Safety and deemed acceptable. The Certificate of Insurance has been reviewed by the Manager, Taxation and is deemed acceptable. The Director, Community Services and Division Head, Culture & Recreation recommend that a concession licence agreement be initiated with Recreation Leisure • Services Ltd. for a 3 year term beginning in September 2012 and ending April 30, 2015. Attachments: 1. Concession Licence Agreement 2. Supply & Services Memorandum dated August 8, 2012 3. Supply & Services Memorandum dated August 14, 2012 Prepared By: Approved / Endorsed By:// �.� - Marisa Carriirio Everett Buntsm ! Manager, Culture & Recreation Director, Community Services CORP0227-07/01 revised Report CS 43-12 September 10, 2012 4 e Subject: Pickering Recreation Complex Concession Page 3 Licence Agreement Vera A. Felgeniacher Gillis Paterson, CMA C.P.P., CPPO, CPPB, C.P.M., CMM Ill Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer Manager, Supply & Services Stephen Reynolds Division Head, Culture & Recreation :mc Recommended for the consideration of Pickering City Council raZie Azzi3 2 Tony Prevedel, P.Eng. Chief Administrative Officer CORP0227-07/01 revised - C p C s i c pad , r7 <_ f THIS CONCESSION LICENCE AGREEMENT is made as of September 19, 2012. BETWEEN : RECREATION LEISURE SERVICES LTD. (the "Operators") - and - THE CORPORATION OF THE CITY OF PICKERING (the "City") WHEREAS the City is the owner of the Pickering Recreation Complex Arena which contains a snack bar concession facility; and WHEREAS the City wishes to retain the Operators to operate the concession on its behalf. NOW THEREFORE the parties agree as follows: • Definitions 1. In this Agreement, (a) "Concession" means the snack bar concession facility located in the Pickering Recreation Complex (Arena only) owned by the City located at 1867 Valley Farm Road in the City of Pickering; (b) "Director" means the Director of the City's Community Services Department or a designate; and (c) "term" means the term of this Agreement, including any renewal, as set out in Section 2. Term 2. The City grants to the Operators the right to operate the Concession for the purpose of providing snack bar services during the months of September to April, both inclusive, for the period beginning September 1, 2012 and ending April 30, 2015. 3. Either the Operators or the City may terminate this Agreement prior to its expiry by giving 90 days written notice to the other. _. 7 ) The Operators Concession Agreement ek6\� 2 oe `3 Page 2 Fees 4. The Operators shall pay to the City the annual sum of$2,000.00 (including HST) in equal monthly installments of$250.00 (including HST) on the first day of each month (September to April) of the original term. Operations 5. The Operators and all of their servants, agents and employees shall, (a) comply strictly with all applicable by-laws, rules and regulations governing the conduct and operation of its business in the Concession; (b) operate the Concession during the times and on the days agreed to by the Director; (c) keep accurate books and records of the operation of the Concession and allow the Director to inspect the books and records; (d) obtain all necessary permits, licenses and approvals that may be required in connection with the operation of the Concession; • (e) pay all realty, business or other taxes or rates that may be levied against the lands upon which the Pickering Recreation Complex is located, against the Arena Concession operation or against the operators as a result of its operation of the Arena Concession; (f) maintain in good repair the Concession and the equipment in it; (g) maintain the Concession in a clean, sanitary and attractive condition satisfactory to the Director throughout the term and, at the end of the term,. repair or replace any damages to the Concession except reasonable wear and tear; (h) provide a good standard of service to the public patronizing the Concession; (i) conduct concession operations that are in compliance with the Province of Ontario's Eat Smart!®for Recreation Centres; and (j) comply with the provisions of the agreement dated September 1, 2003 between the City and Coca-Cola Bottling Ltd. set out in Schedule A to this Agreement. 6. The Operators shall obtain the approval of the Director before altering, adding to or varying in any way all or any part of the Concession. Any approved alteration, 2 The Operators Concession Agreement ` CL9f' of (3 Page 3 0 addition or variation shall be undertaken at the Operators' sole expense and shall become the property of the City at the end of the term. Insurance 7. Prior to occupying the Concession, the Operators, at their own expense, shall provide, (a) comprehensive general public liability insurance, identifying the City as an additional insured, including coverage for personal injury, contractual liability, tenant's legal liability, non-owned automobile liability, death and property damage, on an occurrence basis with respect to the business carried on at the Concession and The Operators' use and occupancy of the Concession, with coverage for any one occurrence or claim of not less than $5,000,000, which insurance shall protect the City in respect of claims by The Operators as if the City was separately insured; (b) insurance in respect of fire and other perils covering the leasehold improvements, trade fixtures, furniture and equipment in the Concession for not less than the full replacement cost thereof; and (c) a certificate of insurance coverage in a form satisfactory to the City, prior to The Operators occupying the Concession, which insurance coverage shall be kept in full force and effect throughout the term. 8. The Operators shall not do or omit or permit to be done anything which causes any insurance premium of the City to be increased, and if any insurance premium shall be so increased, the Operators shall pay to the City forthwith upon demand the amount of such increase. If notice of cancellation or lapse shall be given respecting any insurance policy of the City or if any insurance policy shall be cancelled or refused to'be renewed by an insurer by reason of the use or occupation of the Concession, the Operators shall forthwith remedy or rectify such use or occupation upon being requested to do so in writing by the City and if the Operators shall fail to do so the City may, at its option, terminate this Agreement forthwith by notice to the Operators and the Operators shall immediately vacate the Concession. Liability of the City 9. The City shall not be liable to the Operators for any loss of or damage to the Concession or any equipment or inventory in it, whether caused by fire, theft, burglary or otherwise, unless such loss or damage was caused by the negligence of the City, its servants, agents or employees. 10. The Operators shall indemnify the City and each of its servants, employees and agents from and against all actions, suits, claims and demands which may be brought against any of them, and from and against all losses, costs, charges, 3 ?Ole_ Lk. Page 4 The Operators Concession Agreement damages and expenses which may be sustained by any of them as a result of the Operators' use and occupation of the Concession. Default 11. If at any time the Operators are in default in the performance of any of the obligations under this Agreement and such default continues for 15 days after the receipt by the Operators of notice from the Director setting out the particulars of such default, the City shall have the right to terminate this Agreement forthwith and thereupon all the rights of the Operators under this Agreement shall immediately cease and the City shall not be liable for payment to the Operators of any moneys whatsoever by reason of such termination. 12. If any outstanding fees are not paid as required by this Agreement, the City shall be entitled to retain and dispose of any equipment installed in the Concession in order to satisfy the outstanding fees and the costs of collecting them. General 13. The Director shall have the right to enter the Concession at any time for any reason provided all reasonable efforts are made to minimize any disruption to the Operators' use of the Concession. 14. The Operators shall not exhibit or allow to be exhibited in the Concession any sign, notice, notice board, painting, design or advertisement without the prior,consent of the Director. 15. This Agreement shall not be assignable by the Operators without the consent of the City, which consent may be arbitrarily refused. 16. This Agreement shall ensure to the benefit of and be binding upon the parties and their respective successors and permitted assigns. 17. No amendment to this Agreement shall be effective unless it is in writing and signed by both parties. 19. (1) Any notice to the City under this Agreement shall be in writing and shall be delivered to the following address: Pickering Civic Complex One The Esplanade Pickering, Ontario L1V 6K7 Attention: City Clerk • 4 • The Operators Concession Agreement P J Page 5 51 (2) Any notice to the Operators under this Agreement shall be in writing and shall be delivered to the following address: Recreation Leisure Services Ltd. P.O. Box 71504 Aurora, ON L4G 6S9 Attention; Rusty Barrese (3) Notice shall be sufficiently given if delivered in person or sent by registered mail or sent by facsimile transmission during normal business hours on a business day. (4) Each notice sent shall be deemed to have been received on the day it was delivered or on the third business day after it was mailed. (5) The parties may change their address for notice by giving notice to the other in the manner provided in this section. IN WITNESS WHEREOF the parties have signed this Agreement. THE CORPORATION OF THE CITY OF PICKERING David Ryan, Mayor Debbie Shields, Clerk 5 Y (c) SCHEDULE A Certain provisions of the Agreement dated September 1,2003, between the CITY (herein referred to as the "CITY") and Coca-Cola Bottling Ltd., (therein referred to as the "Company") 1. For the purposes of this Agreement, (a) "Arenas" means the Arenas located at 1867 Valley Farm Road; (b) "Event" means any scheduled or rescheduled sporting event, sporting competition or sporting contest conducted in either of the Arenas; (c) "Soft Drink Beverages" means, (i) all carbonated and non-carbonated soft drink beverages; (ii) all syrups from which carbonated and non-carbonated soft drink beverages may be prepared for immediate consumption by the addition of carbonated or non-carbonated water; and (iii) all carbonated and non-carbonated fruit drinks, machine-vended fruit juices, potable waters and any other non-alcoholic beverages for immediate consumption, including all syrups and preparations from which the same may be prepared; (d) "Soft Drink Beverages of the Company" means those Soft Drink Beverages which from time to time are manufactured, sold or distributed by the Company; (e) "Soft Drink Dispensing Equipment" means those devices for the dispensing or storage of soft drink beverages more particularly described in Schedule A hereto and such further similar devices supplied by the Company pursuant to this Agreement; (f) "Term" means the term of this Agreement which shall commence at 6:00 am on September 1, 2003 and shall expire at midnight on August 31, 2013. ADVERTISING - HOCKEY SCOREBOARD, TIME-OF-DAY CLOCK AND MENU BOARDS 2. (1) During the Term, the Company shall have the exclusive right to place advertising, at its cost, on the hockey scoreboard, the clock and the menu boards by decorating them in full colour with advertising material for one or The Operators Concession Agreement ' Paged 7 more of the Soft Drink Beverages of the Company and may change the advertising material from time to time during the Term. (2) The Company shall, at its cost, maintain and repair the advertising in good and attractive order, normal wear and tear only excluded. 3. The CITY shall not permit any commercial signage or messages other than the advertising material of the Company to be placed on the ice re-surfacing unit, the hockey scoreboard, the clock or the menu boards. 4. The CITY shall not permit any advertising, promotion or mention of any nature or description, whether visual or oral (including the public address system in the Arenas), of any Soft Drink Beverage which is not a Soft Drink Beverage of the Company in or about the Complex including its structures, hallways, concourses or at any outside entrances to the Complex and regardless of whether or not it is within the view or hearing of any existing or future spectator seat in the Complex, save and except where necessary to describe a team or a member of a team that is sponsored by a Soft Drink Beverage company other than the Company. 5. The CITY shall not grant to any manufacturer, bottler or supplier of Soft Drink Beverages, other than Soft Drink Beverages of the Company, the right to associate itself or its Soft Drink Beverages with the Complex or any part thereof in any manner directly or by implication. SOFT DRINK DISPENSING EQUIPMENT 6. The CITY, at its cost, shall keep the Soft Drink Dispensing Equipment in good repair, condition and working order and shall furnish any parts required to keep it in good mechanical and working order. 7. Without the prior written consent of the Company, the CITY shall not make any alterations, additions or improvements to the equipment; all alterations, additions and improvements made to the equipment shall belong to and become the property of the Company upon the making of the alteration, addition or improvement. 8. The Soft Drink Dispensing Equipment shall be used by the CITY only in the Complex and shall not be removed therefrom or otherwise disposed of without the prior written consent of the Company. 9. The Company may, at its cost, supply and install such additional or replacement Soft Drink Dispensing Equipment as the Company from time to time considers necessary to service the public demand for Soft Drink Beverages at the Complex at such locations within the Complex as are agreed upon by the Parties; such equipment shall be treated as Soft Drink Dispensing Equipment for the purposes of this Agreement. • 7 A t' �'�r ' L'' The Operators Concession Agreement Page 8 10. The CITY shall at all times during the Term keep all syrup heads of the Soft Drink Dispensing Equipment properly identified with the appropriate trade marks of the Company relating to the Soft Drink Beverages of the Company actually dispensed through the heads. 11. No Soft Drink Beverages (other than fruit juices) may be supplied, sold or distributed in the Complex from soft drink dispensing equipment other than the Soft Drink Dispensing Equipment of the Company. COMPLEX SOFT DRINK BEVERAGE SUPPLY 12. (1) During the Term, the Company shall be the sole and exclusive supplier of Soft Drink Beverages for sale or complimentary distribution in the Complex and all parties from time to time selling or distributing Soft Drink Beverages in the Complex shall purchase for resale or distribution at the Complex only the Soft Drink Beverages of the Company at the Company's then prevailing wholesale prices and trade terms which from time to time may exist, provided always that the said wholesale prices of the Company shall remain competitive with the wholesale prices which are from time to time offered by other manufacturers or distributors of nationally known Soft Drink Beverages. (2) The Company shall provide such brands and quantities of Soft Drink Beverages as it considers necessary to service the public demand thereof at the Complex. 13. Notwithstanding any other provision contained herein, the Company shall not be liable hereunder for failure to supply Soft Drink Beverages due to government action, statute, ordinance or regulation; strike or other labour disturbance or disruption; fire damage; lack of or inability to obtain materials, labour, fuel or supplies; act of God; or any other cause, contingency or circumstance which is beyond the control of the Company. GENERAL 14. The employees, representatives and agents of the Company shall be permitted access to the Complex during normal business hours for any purpose provided-for or contemplated in this Agreement. • 8 CS ` 3 - e r I , Repair^r"; pitr,r4" IN Rd CA- Ogle( emo To: Steve Reynolds August 8, 2Q12(,�le�ri red) Division Head, Culture & Recreation From: Manager, Supply & Services Copy: Manager, Culture & Recreation Subject: RFP-5-2012, Pickering Recreation Complex Arena Concession - File: F-5300-001 Request for Proposal No. RFP-5-2012 was posted on the City's website. One (1)proposal was received by the closing date and time. A preliminary review of 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 the Evaluation Committee members and scored to reflect each item's relevance'and value. Please refer to Terms of Reference--Evaluation of Submissions,Page 7 for instructions on how the proposal is to be evaluated by the Evaluation Committee members. Health & Safety documentation has been reviewed by the Co-ordinator, Health & Safety and a score out of 2.5 points has been applied to the evaluation form. Proof of insurance has received a score of 2.5 points and has been applied to the evaluation form. Pricing has been evaluated and a score has been applied to the evaluation form. Attachments are as follows: 1. Stage 1 -Evaluation 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 co mittee. Each member should review the submissions carefully accordina to the criteria bef re the meeting time. If yo require further information, please contact me or a member of Supply& Services. • VAF/jg-1 • Attachments • Z ea a F6 Request for Proposal Pickering Recreation Complex Arena Concession RFP-5-2012 Stage 1 — Evaluation of Mandatory Requirements 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. However, all proposals satisfy the mandatory requirements. Proposals are to include the following mandatory requirements: A. Submission Form (Appendix B); B. Rate Bid Form (Appendix C); C. Reference Form (Appendix D); and D. Other Mandatory Requirements (Appendix E) Section C. Company Item A Item B Item C Item D Recreation Leisure ✓ Services Ltd. • • • • RFP-5-2012 Pickering Recreation Complex Arena Concession Y., , Stage II - Evaluation Rated Criteria Stage II will consist of a scoring by the City of each qualified proposal on the basis of the rated criteria. Proponents should refer to Appendix E— RFP Particulars —Section D. Rated Criteria for a breakdown of the Rated Criteria. D. RATED CRITERIA The following is an overview of the categories and weighting for the rated criteria of the RFP. • Proponents who do not meet a minimum threshold score for a category will not proceed to Stage III of the evaluation process. Rated Criteria Category Weighting (Points) Overall completeness and quality of proposal 10 points - Executive Summary 15 points Experience and Qualifications 20 points Concession Operation .25 points Insurance, Health & Safety Documentation . 5 points - Pricing 25 Points Total Points 100 Points Overall completeness and quality of proposal — Total Points = 10 Points All requested documentation, and certificates are include with proponents submission and are current and valid. Executive Summary — Total Points = 15 Points The executive summary shall be submitted with the proponent's submission and shall include the following: (a) The signature of a person authorized to commit the Proponent to the extent of work and financial obligation included in the proposal shall appear on the Executive Summary. Indicate the current legal identity of your firm; (b) An outline of the proposal, including drawings of the proposed facility, inclusive of signage, and a schedule of completion of work and opening of the facility..Rough sketches are acceptable. Experience and Qualifications— Total Points = 20 points Each proponent should provide the following in its proposal: (a) a description of the goods and services the proponent has previously and/or is currently delivering, with an emphasis on experience relevant to the Deliverables; (b) the roles and responsibilities of the proponent and any of its agents, employees and sub- contractors who will be involved in providing the Deliverables, together with the identity of those who will be performing those roles and their relevant respective expertise; (c) its knowledge, skills and expertise in the safe operation a Concession; and . �aeciG 6" J (d) a Reference Form in accordance with the ins ruc ions s set out n the Form attached as Appendix D to the RFP. Deliverables — Total Points = 25 points (a) Philosophy of operating a Concession, including but not limited to mission statement, guiding principles and values. (b) Detailed information on the proposed menu items that confirms compliance the Government of Ontario's The Eat Smart!® Recreation Centre Program. • (c) Acceptance of the exclusive beverage supply agreement between the City of Pickering and the Coca Cola Bottling Company. (d) Procedures and policies for pricing of products or menu items. (e) List of the type of equipment to be used in the Concession area(s). (f) Procedures and plans for proper food storage, handling and service. (g) Proposed hours of the Concession. (h) Names of Concession owners and operators as well as anticipated number of staff. (i) Outline of the anticipated usage by customers over a given period of time. (j) Procedures for conflict resolution between the proponent and City staff. (k) How Customer Satisfaction will be measured and procedures to provide high quality service. Insurance, Health & Safety Documentation —Total Points = 5 Points • • Zr E. Pricing — Total Points = 25 points r' Proponents should review and complete the Rate Bid Form at Appendix C. Pricing will be scored based on.a relative pricing formula using the sum total of flat monthly fees for Year 1 , Year 2, and Year 3 as set out in the Rate Bid Form. Each proponent will receive a percentage of the total possible points allocated to the sum total of flat monthly fees for Year 1, Year 2, and Year 3 bid on by dividing that proponent's sum total of flat monthly fees for Year 1, Year 2, and Year 3 into the highest bid price. For example, if a proponent bids $1000.00 for sum total of flat monthly fees for Year 1, Year 2, and Year 3 and that is the highest bid price, that proponent receives 100% of the possible points for that sum total of flat monthly fees for Year 1, Year 2, and Year 3 (1000/1000 = 100%). A proponent who bids $500.00 receives 50% of the possible points for that sum total of flat monthly fees for Year 1, Year 2, and Year 3 (500/1000 = 50%), and a proponent who bids $300.00 receives 30% of the possible points for that sum total of flat monthly fees for Year 1, Year 2, and Year 3 (300/1000 = 30%). Highest sum total of flat monthly fees for Year 1, Year 2, and Year 3 x Total available points = Score for proposal with second-highest rate Second-highest sum total of flat monthly fees for Year 1, Year 2, and Year 3 Highest sum total of flat monthly fees for Year 1, Year 2, and Year 3 x Total available points = Score for proposal with third-highest rate Third- highest sum total of flat monthly fees for Year 1, Year 2, and Year 3 And so on, for each proposal. • s.-. -i)-0,-.;Foh,,, ,, _... , . ... 6 0 T6 t 0 42 0 .= 703 (Q ce (7 J 13- 4 or) c in a. 1.11 N 0 U) +A O C C •— La 0 Ln n CL c.i u) In c c oi — so U) U) - - (D o u) c.) Do '2 'W >, C O -C ,•-•' a) Lc) 0 w a3 E ci- cNi co a) (I) n ID a) C i. 0 • CO o c4 a e a < x = C CD CD 2 C •U) . O 4 .— -0 E (7) u) co c) c) (D a., O 1 CO. ll) c E 00 N O 0 0 a) os c (I) cto CD a) C u) C L. 0 0 0 0) O — .4. 4.• a) Cti C ., C &5 (I) T:3 CZ • C0 0 a.. c3) > .r. x iii .3 N a) a -NC C.) •12: a) U) NC 0 cl 0,a) c■1 x n u.) to WC/) %— 0_ u_ C4 . u) 4-- CD 0 a) '—' C -Ei C E CD ° z 0 0 (• 13 i) _o E a a) .) U) ++ D 2 c .u)0_ a) 0 .— 0; -o a. .._, -di ...-(1) E. .0 0 2 E th •C (t 0 a.) a) w r. r' Litt/ 4 - (,;pct se. 1 Z 1 ,,,° - * -44-I } r` i, ocariatirec Memo To: Steve Reynolds August 14, 2012 Division Head, Culture & Recreation From: Vera A. Felgemacher Manager, Supply & Services Copy: Manager, Culture & Recreation Subject: RFP-5-2012, Pickering Recreation Complex Arena Concession File: F-5300-001 The Evaluation Committee has completed its Stage III review consisting of evaluation of Rated Criteria and Pricing. A copy of the Evaluation Committee Summary of Average Score form is attached. An Evaluation Committee meeting was held Monday, August 13, 2012 at 2:00 p.m. and a combined average score for the single proposal received was determined. The combined average score of the proposal then proceeded 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 have been added. Recreation Leisure Services Ltd. is the single highest ranking proponent with a flat annual fee of $2,000.00 for the Pickering Recreation Complex Arena Concession. In accordance with Purchasing Policy and Procedure PUR 010, Item 06.13, revenue generating proposals for services are subject to the approval of Council prior to the Manager awarding the contract. PI ase do not disclose any information to proponents. Enquiries may be redirected to Supply& Se ices. VAF/jg Attachment :1 0 (. 9 p c 2 6T 2 r- CD CO a. c9 z_ Y z g J Qo F- O . O W c W . W 0 F-- W H co W -- 2 * Q 0 W 0 O2 O as IF— 0 O. c� 4 (D c - W w• 0Q 2O w O � o 00 < 2W U o U QO O2 DZ o � � U c� m 0' � � W Lu C W =HW ". 2 c L 2 W a) U 0 O Q. co O - . 0 C I- N z u2 Q W L a) z ..- 0 Z — 0 0 o m a_ L a) iii a) (0 O- N N co `O n Co a_ m 0 City o4 Report to Executive Committee PICKERI1vG Report Number: CS 45-12 Date: September 10, 2012 7 From: Everett Buntsma Director, Community Services Subject: City of Pickering Comments on the Regional Cycling Plan Review - File: A-1140 Recommendation: 1. That Report CS 45-12 of the Director, Community Services regarding the Regional Cycling Plan Review be received; 2. That Council advise Regional Council that it supports: a) the proposed Primary Cycling Network as set out in Attachment#2 to Report CS 45-12; b) the proposed Cycling Treatment Types as set out in Attachment #5 to Report CS 45-12 subject to incorporating the treatment types for Regional Roads in Seaton as shown on the Cycling and Pedestrian Facilities Map in the Regional Class EA for the Central Pickering Development Plan; c) the Region's proposed funding change for paved shoulders on Regional Roads from the former 50/50 cost sharing arrangement with the area municipalities, to the Region now being 100% responsible for the capital construction costs for all on-road cycling facilities and,paved shoulders on Regional Roads; d) the Region continuing its practice of being 100% responsible for maintenance of all on-road cycling facilities and paved shoulders on Regional Roads that form part of the Primary Cycling Network; 3. That Council request Regional Council to: a) dedicate a minimum of$500,000 annually from its Roads Capital Program to fund the construction, repair, maintenance, monitoring and promotion of the Regional Cycling Plan; b) revise its practice where the Region is only responsible for providing the platform for multi use paths within Regional Road rights-of-way, such that it also be responsible for 50/50 cost sharing with area municipalities for construction costs (i.e. granular and asphalt), signage, marking and other amenities; Report CS 45-12 September 10, 2012 Regional Cycling Plan Review Page 2 4, A c) include a revision to the current Regional policy such that the implementation of the Regional Cycling Plan is not confined strictly to correspond with road construction projects, but rather be prioritized and constructed, as appropriate, to close gaps and facilitate key connections along road segments that are not necessarily due for reconstruction; d) direct Regional staff to prepare a more detailed phasing program, in 5 year increments, for the 2017-2032 time frame; and 4. Further, that the City Clerk forward a copy of Report CS 45-12 to the Regional Municipality of Durham and all local municipalities in Durham Region. Executive Summary: The Region of Durham is currently undertaking a review of its Regional Cycling Plan. On February 21, 2012, City Council requested Regional staff to: include a commitment for continuous funding to address the construction, repair, maintenance, monitoring and promotion of the Regional Cycling Plan; revise the current Regional policy to consider closing network gaps to facilitate key cycling connections independent of road construction along cycling spines; and, provide for further public consultation. The draft updated Regional Cycling Plan report was released on June 6, 2012, with comments from area municipalities due by September 30, 2012. Staff has reviewed the Region's report and generally supports the Primary Cycling Network as it now includes other Regional Roads such as Altona Road, Finch Avenue and Liverpool Road. This enhanced cycling network builds on Pickering's cycling initiatives with strategic connections to downtown Pickering, the GO Station and the waterfront. The proposed treatment types (i.e. cycling lanes, buffered cycling lanes, cycling tracks, multi use paths, paved shoulders) proposed on Regional Roads are supported by staff. Additional treatment types for Seaton, as identified in the Region's EA for the Central Pickering Development Plan, must be incorporated. To ensure that there is continuous, reliable and sustainable funding to support the Regional Cycling Plan Network, it is recommended that the Region dedicate a minimum of$500,000 annually from its Roads Capital Program to fund the construction, repair, maintenance, monitoring and promotion of the Regional Cycling Plan. Financial Implications: There are short and long term financial implications to the City regarding the Regional Cycling Plan. For the short term, 2012 to 2016, the preliminary capital financial projection for Pickering for cycling facilities on Regional Roads is $942,000. It is anticipated that this amount will be funded from Development Charges and the City Share Reserve. Report CS 45-12 September 10, 2012 Regional Cycling Plan Review Page 3 «f M, For the longer term, 2017 to 2032, the preliminary estimate for Pickering for cycling facilities on Regional Roads is $4.4 million in total. Finance staffs preliminary funding strategy related to this capital cost is to use a combination of property taxes, Federal Gas Tax (FGT) and Development Charges. The above amount excludes the additional Pickering cost to build or implement cycling facilities on local roads, needed to connect to the Primary Cycling Network. The capital construction cost represents only one component of the total cost. After the cycling facilities are constructed, additional City resources would be required to inspect, monitor and maintain off-road cycling facilities on an annual basis. Also, insurance claim costs associated with off-road cycling facilities on Regional road rights-of way will be the City's responsibility. Discussion: Overview On June 8, 2011, Regional Council requested the eight local municipalities to suggest modifications to the current Regional Cycling Plan The current Regional Cycling Plan was approved by Regional Council in October 2008 (see Attachment#1 — Existing Regional Cycling Plan). On June 8, 2011, Regional Council requested the eight local municipalities to provide suggestions for modifications to the Regional Cycling Network by September 2011 as input into an updated Regional Cycling Plan. On October 17, 2011, City Council endorsed Report CS 39-11 and recommended changes to the Regional Cycling Plan On October 17, 2011, Council endorsed Report CS 39-11 that contained staffs recommended modifications to the Regional Cycling Plan to add existing and future Regional roads as Regional Cycling Spines, such as Altona Road, Finch Avenue, Westney Road, Liverpool Road and future roads in Seaton such as the Whitevale Road By-pass, Rossland Road (Third Concession Road) extension, and Whites Road extension. Staff also recommended that the funding formula be revised such that the Region be 100% responsible for the cost of paved shoulders, on-road and off-road cycling lanes and that the cost of construction for multi use bikeway paths be equally shared between the Region and the City instead of solely by the City. Report CS 45-12 September 10, 2012 Regional Cycling Plan Review Page 4 ; 6 On February 21, 2012, City Council endorsed CS 09-12 and requested Regional Council to include a number of changes including a commitment for sustainable funding On February 21, 2012, Council endorsed staff comments contained in Report CS 09-12 that requested the Region to provide area municipalities sufficient time to review and comment on the draft updated Regional Cycling Plan. Also, the Region was requested to: include a commitment for continuous, reliable and sustainable funding to address the construction, repair, maintenance, monitoring and promotion of the Regional Cycling Plan; revise the current regional policy to consider closing network gaps to facilitate key cycling connections independent of road construction along cycling spines; and modify the current work plan to require further public consultation. On June 6, 2012, Regional Council released the proposed Regional Cycling Plan for public consultation On June 6, 2012, Regional Council released Commissioners' Report No. 2012-J-18 containing the proposed Primary Cycling Network (Regional Cycling Plan) and implementation framework for public consultation. Area municipal councils were requested to comment on the proposed Primary Cycling Network and implementation framework prior to September 30, 2012. Comments Staff's review has focused on the Regional Cycling Plan as it affects Pickering (Part A— Primary Cycling Network, Treatment Types and Phasing) and the implementation framework (Part B — Capital Costs, Funding Strategies and Risks and Liabilities). Part A - Regional Cycling Plan Primary Cycling Network Staff generally supports the proposed Primary Cycling Network as it now includes the addition of Altona Road, Finch Avenue, Liverpool Road and future Regional Roads in Seaton The proposed Primary Cycling Network is based on routes that connect major centres, inter-modal facilities and destinations; and provides service between communities, area municipalities and other regions (see Attachment#2 - proposed Primary Cycling Network for South Durham). Staff have enlarged the proposed Cycling Network for the Pickering area (see Attachment#3 - draft Primary Cycling Network for Pickering). The Primary Cycling Network includes 205.6 kilometres of cycling facilities on Regional roads of which 72.2 kilometres (35.1%) are in Pickering. The network in Pickering has evolved to include the following additions: • Altona Road from Kingston Road to Finch Avenue • Finch Avenue from Brock Road to Altona Road Report CS 45-12 September 10, 2012 Regional Cycling Plan Review ' Page 5 %. • Liverpool Road from Finch Avenue to Pickering Parkway; and • future roads in Seaton such as the Whitevale Road By-pass, Rossland Road (Third Concession Road) extension and Whites Road extension In recognition of the implementation constraints at the Highway 401 crossings on Brock Road and Liverpool Road, staff supports an alternate cycling route on Pickering Parkway between Brock Road and Liverpool Road Staff concurs with the Region's assessment regarding bikeway implementation constraints at the Highway 401 crossings on Brock Road, Liverpool Road and Whites Road. These sections of the above-noted roads remain part of the Primary Cycling Network and the provision for cycling facilities at these locations will be considered with future Ministry of Transportation interchange/bridge improvement projects. In the interim, the Region is proposing an alternate cycling route on Pickering Parkway between Brock Road and Liverpool Road leading to the pedestrian bridge over Highway 401. Although Pickering Parkway is under the jurisdiction of the City, this connection would provide a safer route for cyclists accessing either the GO Station or Bayly Street. The feasibility of a cycling facility on Pickering Parkway was assessed earlier in the City's Bikeway and Trail Master Plan (1996) and identified as a potential cycling spine. However, the recommendation for a cycling facility on Pickering Parkway was not implemented. In recognition of the constraints on Bayly Street between Liverpool Road and Whites Road, staff supports an alternate cycling route on local roads The provision of cycling facilities on Bayly Street between St. Martins Drive and Liverpool Road is constrained due to grading issues, utilities, and limited right-of-way width. As an alternative to cycling facilities on Bayly Street between St. Martins Drive and Liverpool Road, staff concurs with the Region's proposal to identify and assess an alternate cycling facility from St. Martins Drive to Radom Street, and Radom Street to Liverpool Road. Cycling facilities are feasible on Bayly Street from St. Martins Drive to West Shore Boulevard including a connection to the Waterfront Trail at the West Shore Community Centre. The cycling segment from West Shore Boulevard to Whites Road is similarly constrained and requires further assessment. Further assessment is required on City roads (i.e. Finch Avenue west of Altona Road, Notion Road, Rougemount Drive and Seventh Concession Road) prior to being identified as regional cycling spines In order to complete the cycling network in Pickering, the Region is proposing that some local roads be considered (i.e. Finch Avenue west of Altona Road, Notion Road, Rougemount Drive and Seventh Concession Road). These road segments require further assessment in terms of existing road conditions, feasibility, and safety. Therefore, it is premature to identify these roads until discussions have concluded. It is Report CS 45-12 September 10, 2012 Regional Cycling Plan Review Page 6 also important to note that Notion Road is a boundary road between the City and the Town of Ajax, with maintenance responsibilities resting with the Town of Ajax. Staff reiterates its previous request that the current Regional policy be revised to consider the implementation of cycling facilities independent of road construction to close network gaps and facilitate key cycling connections Staff had previously commented that the current Regional policy on constructing cycling facilities should be revised to allow the implementation of cycling facilities independent of road construction projects in order to close gaps and facilitate key cycling connections. Regional Report No. 2012-J-18 did not discuss this request. Therefore, staff reiterates its previous request to the Region to consider the implementation of cycling facilities to close network gaps independent of road construction projects. Treatment Types Staff generally supports the proposed Cycling Treatment Types for Regional Roads in Pickering Once the Primary Cycling Network was identified, potential treatment types were selected (i.e. cycling lanes, buffered cycling lanes, cycling tracks, multi use paths, paved shoulders). Consideration was given to corridor-specific characteristics, such as higher commercial vehicle volumes, multiple driveways, on-street parking, safety and right-of-way constraints (see Attachment#4 - Proposed Cycling Treatment Type for Pickering). Staff is generally supportive of the treatment types being proposed for Regional Roads in Pickering, with the exception of Finch Avenue as noted below. Staff supports 1.5 metre wide on-road cycle lanes on both sides of Finch Avenue from Rosebank Road to Brock Road instead of a 3.0 metre multi use path The Region is proposing paved shoulders on Finch Avenue from Altona Road to Rosebank Road and a 3.0 metre multi use path from Rosebank Road to Brock Road. Finch Avenue from Altona Road to Brock Road is a Type B Arterial Road with residential developments on both sides. The traveled portion of Finch Avenue provides an alternative cycling route with enhanced safety due to relatively low operating speeds and traffic volumes. For these reasons, staff recommends 1.5 metre wide on-road cycle lanes on both sides of Finch Avenue from Altona Road to Brock Road. Staff supports a revision to the Cycling Treatment Type for Regional Roads in Seaton to reflect the Region's refinement of the treatment types undertaken as part of the Region's Class EA for the Central Pickering Development Plan A further refinement of the treatment types for Regional Roads in Seaton has resulted as part of the Region's Class EA for Regional Services for the Central Pickering Development Plan. This was shown at the June 27, 2012 Public Information Centre #2 . for the Region's Class EA for the Central Pickering Development Plan (see Attachment Report CS 45-12 September 10, 2012 Regional Cycling Plan Review Page 7 r� #6 — Cycling and Pedestrian Facilities Map). Staff supports the revised treatment types for Regional Roads in Seaton as it promotes increased cycling opportunities both on and off-Regional Roads. Therefore, it is recommended that the Cycling Treatment Type for Pickering be revised to also incorporate the treatment types shown on the Cycling and Pedestrian Facilities Map for the Region's Class EA for the Central Pickering Development Plan. Phasing Staff generally supports the time frame for implementing the Primary Cycling Network The Region is proposing two general time frames to implement the proposed network: short term 5 year (see Attachment #6 — Network Phasing 2012-2016 Pickering) and longer term 6-20 years (see Attachment#7 — Network Phasing 2017-2032 Pickering). These time frames are based on planned road rehabilitation or road expansion work. The short term time frame, 2012-2016, for specific network projects in Pickering is acceptable. In the short term, Brock Road is the only Regional Road within the Primary Cycling Network under construction in Pickering. The Brock Road segments under construction in the 5 year period and the associated City cost for the cycling treatment is provided below: Proposed. Primary Network Phasing (2012-2016) Year Brock Road City Cost Funding 2012 Third Concession $453,000 Development Road to Taunton Charges (DC) Road Funding is 50% DC and 50% City Share Reserve 2013 Pickering Parkway $88,000 Same as above to Finch Avenue 2015 Fifth Concession $194,000 Part of ongoing Road to North of negotiations with Brougham Seaton Landowners Group 2016 Taunton Road to $207,000 Part of ongoing Fifth Concession . negotiations with Road Seaton Landowners Group Report CS 45-12 September 10, 2012 Regional Cycling Plan Review Page 8 � f Based on the Region's 2012 Capital Road Program and Four-Year Forecast, Brock Road improvements from Taunton Road to the Hamlet of Brougham will be implemented by the end of the year 2016. The subsequent long term time frame from 2017 to 2032 is too general and lacking detail for staff to develop a meaningful implementation schedule. It is recommended that the 2017-2032 time frame be broken into 5 year increments to assist area municipalities in their capital forecast and budget approval process. The cost for the City is $541,000 for the years 2012 and 2013 of which 50% would be funded by Development Charges and the remainder funded from the DC City Share Reserve. There are sufficient funds in this reserve to meet the financial obligations. For the years 2015 and 2016, these costs are part of the ongoing discussion and negotiations between the City and the Seaton Landowners Group. Part B — Implementation Framework Funding Strategies Staff supports a continuous, reliable and sustainable funding program in order to implement a successful.Regional Cycling Plan There is a need for the Region to dedicate continuous, reliable and sustainable funding to implement a successful Regional Cycling Plan. In Report No. 2012-J-18 on the Regional Cycling Plan, information is provided on how other two-tier southern Ontario municipalities fund cycling. For example, York Region and Waterloo Region provide $500,000/year and $600,000/year respectively toward their cycling programs. In order to implement a successful Regional Cycling Plan, staff is recommending that the Region consider committing a minimum $500,000 annually in its capital budget for cycling infrastructure. The long term, 2017 to 2032, financial projection from the Region based on the current funding relationship is for the City to pay $4.4 million for multi use paths on Regional Roads. The preliminary funding strategy related to this expenditure is to use a combination of property taxes, Federal Gas Tax (FGT) and Development Charges. The development charge funding will be explored in depth in the next study which is required to be completed by June 30, 2014. Capital Costs Staff supports the proposal for the Region to be 100% responsible for the capital construction costs for all on-road cycling facilities and paved shoulders The Region is proposing that for all on road cycling facilities and paved shoulders, including buffered cycling lanes on Regional Roads that form part of the proposed Primary Cycling Network, the Region will be 100% responsible for all the capital construction cost of providing the cycling facility including land acquisition and utility • Report CS 45-12 September 10, 2012 Regional Cycling Plan Review Page 9 3; relocation, bridge structures and ongoing regular maintenance. Staff supports the proposal for the Region to be 100% responsible for on-road cycling facilities such as bike lanes, paved shoulders and signed-only bike routes on Regional roads. Staff recommends a change to the current practice of the Region being 100% responsible for only providing the platform for a multi use path, to also include construction costs (i.e. granular and asphalt), signage, marking and other amenities being shared 50/50 between the Region and the area municipality The Region is currently responsible for constructing the platform for off-road boulevard bikeways (multi use paths) that are in the Regional Road rights-of-way. The cost also includes land acquisition, utility relocation, and grading and customized bridge structures. The cost of granular, asphalt, signage, marking, path maintenance and repair is the responsibility of area municipality. No change to this practice is proposed by the Region. Staff continues to recommend that this practice be changed such that all construction costs (i.e. granular, asphalt), signage, marking and other amenities be shared 50/50 between the Region and the area municipality, since the multi use path also accommodates cyclists. Risks and Liabilities The insurance risk associated with implementing the Primary Cycling Network is manageable and no different than current practice The City is responsible for maintenance and insurance claims for those multi use paths constructed on Regional Roads paid for by the City. The maintenance element includes inspection (documentation), repair and perhaps even snow and ice removal (depending upon the City's preference to keep the trails open during the winter months.) The larger unknown cost and corresponding financial risk is the potential insurance claims that could be generated from the cycling facilities . The individuals using the cycle system will range in age from pre-teens to seniors representing a wide range of cycling skill level and experience. The City has to ensure that the cycling facilities are maintained in a state of reasonable repair and free of hazards. Regular inspections and documentation by the City will prevent and/or reduce insurance claims. The insurance risk associated with the cycling facilities is manageable. However, Council should be aware that additional resources (staff and equipment) would be required. Report CS 45-12 September 10, 2012 Regional Cycling Plan Review Page 10 2 Attachments: 1. Existing Regional Cycling Plan 2. Proposed Primary Cycling Network for South Durham 3. Proposed Primary Cycling Network for Pickering 4. Proposed Cycling Treatment Type for Pickering 5. Cycling and Pedestrian Facilities 6. Network Phasing (2012-2016) 7. Network Phasing (2017-2032) Prepared By: Approved/Bndorrs dByf -" ) - d Richa d W. Ho orn, P.Eng Everett Buntsma, NPD, CMM Division Head, Engineering Services Director, Community Services jillid:/71Lif:lr. 4. dr.'41''' Grant McGregor, MCI RPP Neil Carry , ' ', RPP Principal Planner - Policy Director, Planning & Development Stan Karwowski Gillis Paterson, CMA Manager, Finance & Taxation Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer GM:jf Recommended for the consideration of Pickering Cit Council 4) ,40.iele Ale. 2-7/ 1012. Tony Prevedel, P.Eng. Chief Administrative Officer ATTACHMENT#, I TO REPORT# CS 4-5 -( 2. z a J a CL O m ° z ,../z n s m A 4 U J C LL 41 C 7 7 N D } o O O m m m H 4 O T O U D W V n i u m J u_a Q a c 6- a a0AW to o u a c c C re o w o Z _a H 0. E m > m c O d p o Ez W C i a 120 J eD 1W Ce act, 0 \\,, _J I Im LVC L\T1J m c iS"\\:".......„........ I., co i 4 N. Sta . .. m Mit � 0 m a r" N .III m iirikik., is _.......s_mill .1 z...., , NI ... -1-04 ran; ---\\ ,m1 in,.....- . ....1 r ...c ill 11: 1-, ) \\\"-, .1.- MI Billall il il fl. pri . 1v �� Paid. .' o f m al All 1 L Y _a .c_.„ (.) ii: ti --4.\\.— \ fc—....\—_...., co i-‘6 a-IMEIVI# Z IC ruzrUrti f-r_C-S Li c - 1 -2__ Ir Bethesda m verlinirremes.eirmi T./ /1 H. I i 1 t I 5 i !, '11, Liberty 41 20 1 Oc 4+ 1 0) $ 1 !! •E : i II ~ I , as .... 1 I I. : ! Regional Rd 57 fe c ri C.) -1 Z -■'_ 2 E 3 8 \ 9. t 2 S Ot 2 2 •L''' P c‘i I o i 1 . a, g e;. -E, g 0 ,,. . - 0 0 • fic-,-- Soll c E 0 er 2 E i a .'- z : 7, g ,:, & , • ..-, a - . 1 g k 1 -1 ,g k 8 E g I 1 I , ••• 0 ? • • I 0 i I Cantos /ilk r'2 i I I : f ' , c I I It -- 8 r 1 § nil II , . .... , : ot, ; •., - • m., 11 ...i.=•... .1 ■ 1: 1•••.■• 1 t 1 1 • 1 1 1 1 $ r I -1C 1 Thornton 2 1 I s. I • * / I ; N : 1 1 Thickson , 1° 1 ....• - .) I t 2* ft..."2.12.1.,..1.1 34 Hook ne , I. Pa L'a I !Ayr • 11 Ir JO 1:1 np. 1: ■ I >• ,g I 1: 00••• -• • :4-. •• i ,- Henry t file .c COChrarle , ' t i •■••■•11 , m •rr. 4.. I I 1 , CO 1 I 1 I I - '.•. • • • comn.uon • 2 C•Z e—IR 1 - tz E , Audi, I 0 I ... , I. Cl I 1 I J i 1 co co w.tne . .g r-. < . ....,...... i.. 4 Sideliner I/ \\' Church 1 $11 • Z 7 1 C . r■ 7.1 . t, >, • .,,, (...) t. • - 1— z 1— as c) • oä w z E c • ZE01... 4. C Ct. ..V 0 •3 1 0 •, • Z Z W AX E I II -. I 1 OK 8 Li EL, -c 0 TO .r o_ L1J CI CI I 1.9 0 ..— L. • • 1 ul • ATTACHMENT# 3 TO REPORT #_g 3 Li-5 12 PROPOSED PRIMARY CYCLING NETWORK(PICKERING) Nid known.. i!!. 1-J, .1r ) 1 Pickering K Sevai01 CarNOn t ipit II , . H i 1111 gh∎ra f '� ,, roillu ___----- -- •� Wl Eeva ... i Cancemsian Rd 5 -s.? Ajax 3 I 3 , t- 11 J n. i' s - f- _e. q;•t ``�+ ,�� i■1111 1111 lir .c rtsi- - Rasamn4 a ' II Pr i Proposed Primary Cycling Network L . ilip,_ ... ...1..,5 • I ?' Regional • = • Local cl I° - 1 • • • Provincial `T ■ g t � =r ti-4 0 Provision for Cycling facilities to be Considered t iiiiigt r► with Future MTO Interchange/Bridge Projects •'I `_ Waterfront Trail 147��� • Existing Go station AIL` n.■111 4: 14� 0 Proposed Go station •tit-tor ti Go' GDP r V - Regional centre If a_ ATTACHMENT# 1 TO REPORT# c 9-5 - 12 PROPOSED CYCLING TREATMENT TYPE(PICKERING) 4... Hirst h Canoeaahn - ex. 1 .c._/_..4._ .........1 (----z---' ' 4.-- , 1 c\-.1 1 4... J ( 1 I Pickering r r) l . cl � I Secih Can...kr, , t I k rid 1 1 b. • Highway 7_ i�'., . ,, I moor PP am ' Wht w! Cancessun Rd$ ill 1 1II t, Ajax 0 3 1r _; Proposed Primary Cycling Network 7 Type ,, •■•Two-way Cycle Track '� Multi-Use Trail r n w Buffered Cycle Lane ! 7 \ t 4il � +�' Cycling Lane ppl5----:„ _N� 11 JA Filch ilti�rriGwr'- Paved Shoulder �L ,. 61�"' f��� I�_=� �F ��,+ •Signed Jar ! o'w' % iara � _ P� .1 �OtherTrail 30 h• M I Eli? ' Pedestrian Bridge �� 1'111.. t7 t I >� 1 Provision for Cycling facilities to be Considered w � with Future MTO Interchange/Bridge Projects ` —Li1 1 - 'I _t • Existing Go station . - r fCr1) �_ ,rN; •� I • Proposed Go station ��ir - —1--f Go Rail b ' r Regional centre ,- n v 1 AT ACHMENT# 5 TO REPORT# CS L —1 Z �m me } E c u t i \; A m "' o f i fi�4 1 T P a 9 :... r.s: ' m CO Z c, 3 I Y W 5 m t) U v r, J R i C O 4 • O \ tL , e t N � y 't co \ r. . ; to ..... air tL I 2 lif 'At4 tia i .„., .. .., Hf I. ,, .,....., ,f... ..., ,- ,,,,,,,,, 1 .'"'"4.4.."7 73 t; %, . 411111111)/ . , , ,. ' =,,, I- "4 U Y 9 u A 0 ti T m E 2, m m g', t ° O1 .J L m U 0. T Q F., m m" N x 'E @ ° c - c m t m .- d d ,...1)...... y NlsNauN1� n u - 2 CO a <0 0 a �J II , IIj2 g 314413015 N1s -_ Y m CaunaONa g ObrlONe c ,00be g C6 a '/� 3hilRbSN1K 3NVl Atlb39ln1Y Q) J' 3.l V1 Atl11100� . :Q g .+—• I) 11«13015 ON.-- -, N0, 3ur3p btl ` �U E �' R 3Y1304S Qa \` ti 0. j g \ c !.y 3w13ars NI.Z \1 • I tom 0//��\\ ,, •_• N�13O15 N19Z -.-... Q ' NdSN31%3 Cu MOW mow'`[ IMl3d5 N14Z ¢ Cl_ L t v 0) ; I -0 a W L.,' OH NINON Oa NO.., OH en,i ^ ig U L C13 2 U a G a U _ 3N113OS Pet Ob NNW/ g C 11 _ L o C. C--C U`` i ^ m I 0 I I U3N0 CVIthC CNOA 3N.1433n1«+13 n1. . 1- ATTACHMENT# & TO REPORT#._ ( .3 4S— ( 2 - NETWORK PHASING 2012-2016(PICKERING) Ninth Canoeaaian 1 Pickering Sevantll Canoaaam -- -- ------ 1._, - I - it...---..---- r Li r f: 4 _(�- 1 1 Mtk a Cancan:3bn Rd 5 -_ Ajax ti 0 I R. S l5 T 'n ` S2 n r c C I. Proposed Primary Cycling Network . Phasing va - n 2012-2015 ,—t— _. Completed Finch - " - '"= M' > - 0 Provision for Cycling facilities to be Considered Iwith Future MTO Interchange/Bridge Projects p = I t Existing Go station a h - �; Proposed Go station i Go Rail — Regional centre .. s'" --I i i $�l }'1 4 r • ATTACHMENT#_17 CO REPORT#,S 1+5— 12- NETWORK PHASING 2017-2032(PICKERING) 7 9 J....4._i . . Ninth Canoeaage v I 71 � 1.' J , 7-----\\,\ Pickering Iti j sevent Canoeaeia, t t ''''2____E-Ai 0 '%. f _ g t __,.,,..... j, JL— t , r . , ,4),,fr.--,----e. •.: . At I ( Ajax 3' \2 S ,r7E '1.--)._, 1 -11--'' ''' 7 . '71': :. 11.11;:- '4';'''' '''' .;.'"4-.:- .44":11'7-'21.1111.4 :::.C6"-j:L"Proposed Primary Cycling Network ilk °� • I Phasing a re; r X2017-2032 r + 4 ��jj + Completed • I � Provision for Cycling facilities to be Considered lllir�i,. ' .�1111`�r.1c..m abed"' f,.r) Y 9 0 • f "�� , ����'��� with Future MTO Interchange/Bridge Projects �� a 6-104.9'il I �� r Existing Go station 1E161h � - ��+*_ L S Proposed Go station 6'4 a '�� .; �o:+ ' + +-0o Rail y rat i r n M♦.,,r •i:E: . Regional centre irj 114 tU.i4341: _ . AEI 3111i= 1.1p.' "- pl 1. ' i i 1 76 fir . pi ols)1 .1 itts - .,...). — -IT 77_ 1 cal/ 00 A Report To Executive Committee PICKERING G Report Number: CST 22-12 Date: September 10, 2012 From: Gillis A. Paterson Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer Subject: 2012 Final Tax Due Dates for Commercial, Industrial and Multi-Residential Realty Tax Classes Recommendation: 1. That Report CST 22-12 of the Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer be received; 2. That the Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer be authorized•to issue the final 2012 Tax Bills for Commercial, Industrial and Multi-residential properties with a due date of October 12, 2012; 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 2012 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 2012 property taxes for commercial, industrial and multi-residential properties. This billing of final property taxes will raise approximately $25.9 million for the City, Durham Region and School Boards. Tax bills for the Residential tax classes were mailed on May 30, 2012 with due dates of June 27th and September 27th Feort CST 22-12 September 10, 2012 Subject: 2012 Final Tax Due Dates for Commercial, Industrial and Multi- Page 2 Residential Realty Tax Classes Sustainability Implications: Passing the attached By-law will allow the City to obtain the funds required to maintain its financial sustainability objectives as provided for in the 2012 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 2012 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 June 4, 2012. 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%. Report CST 22-12 September 10, 2012 Subject: 2012 Final Tax Due Dates for Commercial, Industrial and Multi- Page 3 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 tax for new construction properties was 60% in 2006. These properties (new construction) are now fully phased-in at 100% CVA tax. 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 2012, the City of Pickering issued an interim tax bill to all property owners in all tax classes with two instalment dates of February 27th and April 27th. The proposed final instalment due date of October 12th 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 2008 to 2012. Table One Non-Residential Final Billing Dates Year Number of Date Instalments 2008 One October 15, 2008 2009 One October 19, 2009 2010 One October 15, 2010 2011 One October 14, 2011 2012 One October 12, 2012 • As Table One indicates, the proposed 2012 final due date closely follows the pattern established prior to 2008. The one instalment due date will assist the City in managing its cash flow. Report CST 22-12 September 10, 2012 Subject: 2012 Final Tax Due Dates for Commercial, Industrial and Multi- Page 4 Residential Realty Tax Classes Attachments: 1 . By-law to Establish the 2012 Final Tax Instalments and Due Date for the Commercial, Industrial and Multi-Residential Tax Classes. Prepared B • Approved/Endorsed By: &WOW Donna�eLong Gillis A. Paterson Supervisor, Taxation Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer Copy: Chief Administrative Officer Recommended for the consideration of Pickering ' y Council ) / 1 ' . 23, acI 2, Tony Prevedel, P.Eng. Chief Administrative Officer ATTACHMENT#_.TO REPORT# The Corporation of the City of Pickering 8 4 By-law No. XXXX/12 Being a By-law to Establish the 2012 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.O. 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.O. 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. 07-2012 to establish tax ratios and By-law No. 09-2012 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. 08-2012 to set and levy rates of taxation for Regional Solid Waste Management and By-law No. 10-2012 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. 7186/12) before the adoption of the estimates for the current year; and, Whereas sub section 342 (2) of the Municipal Act, 2001, S.O. 2001, c.25 as amended, permits the issuance of separate tax bills for separate classes of real property for year 2012. Now therefore the Council of the Corporation of the City of Pickering hereby enacts as follows: 1. For the year 2012, 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. 7216/12 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. By-law No. Page 2 5 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 2012. 4. The 2012 final tax calculations for the industrial, commercial and multi-residential realty tax classes is based on a freeze date of June 4, 2012. 5. The 2012 taxes owed for the commercial, industrial and multi-residential assessed properties shall be due in one instalment on October 12, 2012, 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 instalment 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 instalments 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 passed this 18th day of September 2012. David Ryan, Mayor Debbie Shields, City Clerk Cif co Report To � �-�- Executive Committee PICKERING G Report Number: CST 23-12 Date: September 10, 2012 From: Gillis A. Paterson Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer Subject: 2011 Municipal Performance Measurement Program — Provincially • Mandated Public Reporting of Performance Measures Recommendation: That Report CST 23-12 of the Director, Corporate Services & . Treasurer be received for information. . . Executive Summary:- The City is mandated by the Province of Ontario to report yearly Performance Measures on specific key service areas provided to the public. This . reporting system supports local government transparency and provides the City with useful data to make informed service level decisions while optimizing resources . 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 measures 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 comparison difficult. For example, in 2008, the City had to collect information and report on 28 measures. In 2009, this was increased to 49 measures. Then in 2011, the City had to report on 55 measures. In other cases, the formula used in calculating specific measures are revised making them not comparable to prior years' calculations. For the reporting year 2011, attached are the Municipal Performance Measurement Program (MPMP) results together with a supplemental information package that will be made available on the City's website. The package includes a comparison of the 2011 measures against the 2010, if applicable, and a copy of the Public Notice that will appear in the News Advertiser at the end of September 2012. Financial Implications: This report does not contain any financial implications. • • Discussion: Attachment 1 is the 2011 information mandated by the Province to be reported to the public by September 30, 2012. Note that these measures are from service areas that the City provides to the public. Other service areas not provided by the City like drinking water, police, solid waste and transit are not included in the report. 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 Report CST 23-12 Date: September 10, 2012 Subject: 2011 Municipal Performance Measurement Program Page 2 • i r 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 Building Services where new and modified measures are being reported. Municipalities also continue to improve on their methods of data collection in an attempt to ensure consistency and accuracy in reporting. This leads to improving the measures to better serve the interests of the public and support municipal needs for evaluating the efficiency and effectiveness of the services we provide to 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 continuous 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 2011 measures will be posted on the City's website, as was the case in past years. 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. 2011 Municipal Performance Measurement Program — Public Reporting 2. Comparison of 2011 and 2010 Performance Measures 3. Public Notice to be included in the Community Page of the News Advertiser Prepared By: Approved/Endorsed By: ,„/L: _ r ..a111111110.1..a -� A Dennis P. Arboleda Gillis A. Paterson, CMA Supervisor, Accounting Services Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer Report CST 23-12 Date: September 10, 2012 Subject: 2011 Municipal Performance Measurement Program Page 3 ( tW v Recommended for the consideration of Pickering City Council 4.2 k . G1, Tony Prevedel, P.Eng. Chief Administrative Officer ATTACHMENT#.,.1__TO REPORT#.1/J. 3-1, City of Pickering Year 2011 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 2011 Financial Information Return (FIR) package, has submitted financial and related service performance measurements to the Province. This program was announced in year 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 constituents 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 of 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. In 2010, all Total Costs per unit measures are to be calculated to 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 and 2011, the City of Pickering did not receive any revenue from other municipalities related to capital assets. Hence, all 2010 measures affected by this change should be comparable to 2011. City.of Pickering Year 2011 Performance Measurement Report a New for 2011 , two efficiency measures based on operating costs and total costs were introduced for the new MPMP service area, Building Permits and Inspection Services. Four effectiveness measures for Building Permits were also added to report the median number of days to review complete building permit applications in four different building categories, namely; houses, small buildings, large buildings and complex buildings. For the calculation of measures pertaining to a per person or per 1,000 persons bases, the City population in 2011 was estimated at 92,364 compared to 93,315 in 2010. This lower count was a result of the change in the base level assumptions from which the calculation was derived according to the new census data released by Statistics Canada for 2011. ATTACHMENT# __,TO REPORT# ,,)3-/.) City of Pickering ei Year 2011 Performance Measurement Report General Government 1.1a Operating Costs for Governance and Corporate Management 2011 2010 7.70% 7.90% 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 rl Year 2011 Performance Measurement Report ' General Government 1.1b Total Costs for Governance and Corporate Management 2011 2010 6.60% 6.80% 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. • n 3 City of Pickering Year 2011 Performance Measurement Report Fire Services 2.1a Operating Costs for Fire Services 2011 2010 $1.35 $1.36 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 2010, the decrease in the 2011 measure was primarily due to the increase in the value of property assessment (denominator) from 2010. City of Pickering Year 2011 Performance Measurement Report 9 . Fire Services 2.1b Total Costs for Fire Services 2011 2010 $1.42 - $1.43 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. • City of Pickering t Year 2011 Performance Measurement Report Fire Services 2.2 Residential Fire Related Civilian Injuries 2011 2010 0.032 0.000 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. However, in 2011, there were three reported cases of residential fire related civilian injuries which translates to 0.032 per 1,000 persons. City of Pickering Year 2011 Performance Measurement Report Fire Services 2.3 Residential Fire Related Civilian Injuries — 5 Year Average 2011 2010 0.022 0.021 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 2007 to 2011 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 2007 to 2011. The same five-year average as reported from 2006 to 2010. However, with the decreased population count as adjusted for 2011 compared to 2010, the resulting measure is slightly up as compared to 2010. :r= City of Pickering Year 2011 Performance Measurement Report Fire Services 2.4 Residential Fire Related Civilian Fatalities 2011 2010 0.000 0.000 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 2011, no residential fire related civilian fatality was reported to the OFM. The same as in 2010. City of Pickering Year 2011 Performance Measurement Report 9 Fire Services 2.5 Residential Fire Related Civilian Fatalities — 5 Year Average 2011 2010 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 2007 to 2011 averaged over 5 years per 1,000 persons. The average residential fire related civilian fatality per year for 5 years from 2007 to 2011 is one, as reported to the OFM. This translates to 0.011 per 1,000 persons, the same result in 2010. 0 City of Pickering Year 2011 Performance Measurement Report Fire Services 2.6 Number of Residential Structural Fires 2011 2010 0.365 1.068 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 2011, there were 11 reported residential structural fires compared to 32 in 2010. • City of Pickering Year 2011 Performance Measurement Report Building Services 4.1a Operating Costs for Building Permits and Inspection Services 2011 (New) $5.69 Efficiency Measure Operating costs for building permits and inspection services per $1,000 of construction activity (based on permits issued) Objective Provide efficient process to undertake building permit review and inspection services. General Comments The following factors can influence the above results: • Staff training • Number and type of permit applications • Compliance to Ontario building code and other applicable laws • General economic activity Detailed Comments Building permit and inspection services include activities undertaken by the Building Division that relate to the issuance of permits for the construction, renovation or demolition of buildings under Subsection 8(1) of the Building Code Act, 1992. These services include: administration, assessment of applicable law compliance, plans review, site inspections, building code enforcement activities including issuing orders. On permits: processing/screening of permit applications and issuing permits, prosecutions, record keeping and reporting obligations, staff training, other building permits and inspection services. Operating costs (numerator) used in the calculation of this measure is the sum of salaries, wages and staff benefits, contracted services, rents, financial expenses, external transfers, allocation of program support and interfunctional adjustments. This amount divided by the total value of construction activity (denominator) based on permits issued divided by $1,000. City of Pickering 1 0 E Year 2011 Performance Measurement Report Building Services 4.1b Total Costs for Building Permits and Inspection Services 2011 (New) $5.69 Efficiency Measure Total costs for building permits and inspection services per $1,000 of construction activity (based on permits issued) Objective Provide efficient process to undertake building permit review and inspection services. General Comments The following factors can influence the above results: • Staff training • Number and type of permit applications • Compliance to Ontario building code and other applicable laws • General economic activity Detailed Comments Total cost is calculated by adding the total operating costs, interest on long term debt and amortization less revenue from other municipalities for tangible capital assets. Since there were no related interest on long term debt and amortization costs in 2011, this equals the operating costs. • City of Pickering ; Year 2011 Performance Measurement Report Building Services 4.2 Review of Complete Permit Applications 2011 (New) Effectiveness Measure Median number of working days to review a complete building permit application and issue a permit or not issue a permit, and provide all reasons for refusal. Objective Process complete building permit applications efficiently and accurately. General Comments The following factors can influence the above results: • Building category where the application falls under • Scope of proposed construction work/extent of plans review necessary • Number and type of permit applications • Completeness of application • Compliance to Ontario building code and other applicable laws • General economic activity To be considered a complete application, a permit application must be made by the owner or authorized agent on a form approved by the Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing, and all applicable fields and schedules must be completed in the application. All fees must be paid in reference to the applicable municipal by-law, resolution or regulation made under clause 7(1)(c) of the Building Code Act. 4.2a Category 1: Houses 2011 (New) Median number of days achieved: 10 days Detailed Comments Include residential buildings not exceeding three storeys or 600 square meters.such as: - A detached house, semi-detached house, townhouse, or row house where no dwelling unit is located above another dwelling unit. - A detached structure that serves a building listed above, that does not exceed 55 square meters in building area. - A tent to which section 3.14 of Division B of the Building Code applies. - A sign to which section 3.15 of Division B of the Building Code applies. The provincial standard period for a building permit to be issued or refused is 10 working days. . • • I. 0 3 City of Pickering Year 2011 Performance Measurement Report 4.2b Category 2: Small Buildings 2011 (New) Median number of days achieved: 13 days Detailed Comments Include buildings with three or fewer storeys in height, not exceeding 600 square meters in area and used for major occupancies, such as: - Group C, residential occupancies - Group D, business and personal services occupancies - Group E, mercantile occupancies - Group F, Divisions 2 and 3, medium and low hazard industrial occupancies. The provincial standard period for a building permit to be issued or refused in this category is 15 working days. City of Pickering Year 2011 Performance Measurement Report I n 4.2c Category 3: Large Buildings 2011 (New) Median number of days achieved: 10 days Detailed Comments .Include large residential, commercial, industrial and institutional buildings used for major occupancies classified as: - Group.A, assembly occupancies - Group B, care or detention occupancies, or - Group F, Division 1, high hazard industrial occupancies. Buildings exceeding 600 square meters in building area or exceeding three storeys in height and used for major occupancies such as: - Group C, residential occupancies Group D, business and personal services occupancies - Group E, mercantile occupancies - Group F, Divisions 2 and 3 Also include farm buildings that exceed 600 square meters in building area. The provincial standard period for a building permit to be issued or refused in this category is 20 working days. CI City of Pickering 1 t' Year 2011 Performance Measurement Report 4.2d Category 4: Complex Buildings 2011 (New) Median number of days achieved: 12 days Detailed Comments Complex buildings include: 1) Post disaster buildings such as hospitals, emergency treatment facilities, blood banks, telephone exchanges, power generating stations, electrical substations, control centres for land transportation, public water treatment and storage facilities, water and sewage pumping stations, emergency response facilities, fire, rescue and police stations, storage facilities for vehicles or boats (used for fire, rescue and police purposes) and communication facilities • including radio and television stations; 2) High buildings to which provisions of subsection 3.2.6 of Division B of the Building Code apply; and 3) Complex buildings with mezzanines to which provisions of Articles 3.2.8.3 to 3.2.8.11 of Division B of the Building Code apply. The provincial standard period for a building permit to be issued or refused in this category is 30 working days. City of Pickering 1 ;i ; Year 2011 Performance Measurement Report Road Services 5.1a Operating Costs for Paved Roads 2011 . 2010 $1,633.78 $1,814.61 Efficiency Measure Operating costs for paved (hard top) roads per lane kilometer. 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. The decrease in the resulting measure for 2011 can be attributed to a combination of a decrease in the total volume of purchased materials and an increase in the kilometer of paved roads maintained compared to 2010. With the repairs done on existing paved roadways, cost of maintenance are reduced accordingly. In 2011, the City maintained 712 kilometers of paved roads compared to 704 kilometers in 2010. 7 of Pickering I 's` Year 2011 Performance Measurement Report Road Services 5.1 b Total Costs for Paved Roads 2011 2010 $5,423.16 $5,574.86 Efficiency Measure Revised Measure - Total costs for paved (hard top) roads per lane kilometer. 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. • Kilometers 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 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 2011, the decrease in the calculation for 2011 was largely due to the decrease in the volume of purchased materials compared to 2010. The City maintained 712 kilometers of paved road in 2011 compared to 704 kilometers in 2010. City of Pickering "? cJ Year 2011 Performance Measurement Report Road Services 5.2a Operating Costs for Unpaved Roads 2011 2010 $5,348.55 $5,188.99 Efficiency Measure Operating costs for unpaved (loose top) roads per lane kilometer. 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 municipality's standard for road conditions in comparison with comparable municipalities. • The kilometers 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 2011, the City used more granular materials on many unpaved roads due to higher rate of washouts in the spring which resulted to increased expenditures. The City maintained 214 kilometers of unpaved lanes in 2011 and in 2010. j 9 City of Pickering Year 2011 Performance Measurement Report Road Services 5.2b Total Costs for Unpaved Roads 2011 2010 $5,403.04 $5,243.48 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 municipality's standard for road conditions in comparison with comparable municipalities. • The kilometers 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 kilometers of unpaved lanes maintained in 2011. The increase in 2011 from 2010 was reflective of the increase in the operating costs calculated from the previous measure. City of Pickering ,, Year 2011 Performance Measurement Report I i 0' Road Services 5.3a Operating Costs for Bridges and Culverts 2011 2010 $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 and age 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 2011, the City did not incur any operating costs related to the repairs & maintenance of bridges and culverts, as was in 2010. However, the total surface area of bridges and culverts measured in 2011 was 8,928 square meters compared to 9,474 in 2010. This decrease was due to the exclusion of bridges and culverts that measure less than 3.0 meters in accordance with the definition, and two railway bridges which were determined to be under the jurisdiction of the railway company. City of Pickering 1 '1 111 Year 2011 Performance Measurement Report Road Services 5.3b Total Costs for Bridges and Culverts 2011 2010 $21.42 $21.35 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 and age 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 slight increase in 2011 compared to 2010 was due to the decrease in the surface area of bridges and culverts used as denominator in the calculation. City of Pickering i 2 Year 2011 Performance Measurement Report Road Services 5.4a Operating Costs for Winter Maintenance of Roads 2011 2010 $1,840.37 $963.32 Efficiency Measure Operating costs for winter maintenance of roadways per lane kilometer maintained in winter. Objective Provide efficient winter maintenance of roadways. General Comments The following factors can influence the above results: • The municipality's standard service levels for road conditions. • The kilometers 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. This figure is directly related to the winter condition during the reporting year. The increase in cost of winter maintenance on roads from 2010 was due to the higher intensity of winter events experienced in 2011. This resulted in more use of de-icing materials and related staff time. The City maintained 926 kilometers of lanes during the 2011 winter season compared to 918 kilometers in 2010. City of Pickering 1 1 Year 2011 Performance Measurement Report Road Services 5.4b Total Costs for Winter Maintenance of Roads 2011 2010 $1,840.37 $963.32 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 kilometers 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 2011, there was no interest and amortization costs for equipment related to winter maintenance of roadways, as was in 2010. Therefore, the resulting measure is the same as the calculated result showing on the operating costs for winter maintenance of roads (see 5.4a). • City of Pickering Year 2011 Performance Measurement Report Road Services 5.5 Adequacy of Roads 2011 2010 86.9% 86.6% 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 2011, 618 out of 711.6 kilometers (86.9%) of paved lane was rated to be in good to very good condition as compared to 610 out of 704 kilometers (86.6%) in 2010. City of Pickering I Year 2011 Performance Measurement Report Road Services 5.6 Adequacy of Bridges and Culverts 2011 2010 74.5% 73.1% 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 2011, a total of 38 bridges and culverts were rated as good to very good out of 51 (74.5%) compared to 38 out of 52 (73.1%) in 2010. The bridge and culvert inventory was revised to 51 in 2011 because the inventory in 2010 included in error a culvert that was less than 3.0 meter in diameter. • City of Pickering 1 r ti • Year 2011 Performance Measurement Report Road Services 5.7 Winter Event Response 2011 2010 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 kilometers 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 2011, the City did not experience a winter event where staff was not able to meet or exceed road maintenance standards. The City responded to 26 winter storm events in 2011 compared to 27 in 2010. All responses met or exceeded the municipal standard winter control maintenance levels. However, note that although there were less winter events in 2011, most were intense as compared to those experienced in 2010. I , City of Pickering Year 2011 Performance Measurement Report Storm Water Management 8.1a Operating Costs for Urban Storm Water Management 2011 2010 $1,870.60 $1,617.07 Efficiency Measure Operating costs for urban storm water management (collection, treatment, and disposal) per kilometer 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 kilometers 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 298 km of urban drainage system in 2011 as compared to 295 in 2010. The increase in the resulting measure for 2011 from 2010 was largely due to the increase in staff salaries/wages/benefits and contracted services. City of Pickering 1 1 s Year 2011 Performance Measurement Report I Storm Water Management 8.1 b Total Costs for Urban Storm Water Management 2011 2010 $8,598.61 $8,289.91 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 kilometers of urban drainage system plus 0.005 kilometer on the total number of catch basins. This provides a picture of how much was spent in the complete management of our urban storm water systems on a per kilometer bases. The City maintained 298 kilometers of urban drainage system in 2011 as compared to 295 kilometers in 2010. A slight increase in the 2011 interest on long term debt and amortization cost related to capital assets resulted to an increase in the measure from 2010. • 1, 9 City of Pickering Year 2011 Performance Measurement Report Storm Water Management 8.2a Operating Costs for Rural Storm Water Management 2011 2010 $2,877.27 $2,744.23 Efficiency Measure Operating costs for rural storm water management (collection, treatment, and disposal) per kilometer 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 include 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 kilometers of drainage system. The 351 km of rural drainage system in 2010 remained unchanged in 2011. The operating cost increase in the resulting measure for 2011 from 2010 was largely due to the increase in maintenance materials throughout the reporting year. • City of Pickering , E.1 ., Year 2011 Performance Measurement Report Storm Water Management 8.2b Total Costs for Rural Storm Water Management 2011 2010 $2,939.39 $2,805.46 Efficiency Measure Total costs for rural storm water management (collection, treatment, and disposal) per kilometer 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 kilometers of rural drainage system plus 0.005 kilometers times the number of catch basins. It provides a picture of how much was spent in maintaining a rural drainage system on a per kilometer basis. The City maintained a total of 351 km of rural drainage system in both 2011 and 2010. The difference in the resulting measure was from the increase in operating costs as calculated in the previous measure (8.2a). City of Pickering Year 2011 Performance Measurement Report Parks and Recreation 11.1a Operating Cost for Parks per Person 2011 2010 $45.40 $41.49 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 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 wetter summer experienced in 2011, costs of materials and contracted services were more compared to 2010. Also, the slight decrease in population count used in the calculation based on the recently released 2011 Census data, the operating cost per person in 2011 came out to be higher as compared to the 2010 calculation. • City of Pickering Year 2011 Performance Measurement Report 1 2 2 Parks and Recreation 11.1b Total Cost for Parks per Person 2011 2010 $54.96 $50.59 Efficiency Measure • Total costs for maintaining the parks per person. Objective Provide efficient operations of parks. - 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 2011. Other than the increase in the operating costs as calculated in 11.1a, there were also slight increases on the amortization and interest on long term debt in 2011 as compared to 2010. These contributed to approximately 8.6% increase in total cost for parks per person from 2010 to 2011.. r �- City of Pickering Year 2011 Performance Measurement Report Parks and Recreation 11.2a Operating Costs for Recreation Programs per Person 2011 2010 $47.97 $47.76 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. This 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. Seasonality of activities also affects the type and frequency of program offerings. In 2011, there was a slight decrease in the overall operating cost for recreation programs from 2010. However, with the lower population count used in the calculation, the resulting figure came out slightly higher compared to 2010. City of Pickering i w; Year 2011 Performance Measurement Report • Parks and Recreation 11.2b Total Costs for Recreation Programs per Person 2011 2010 $47.97 $47.76 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 2011, 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 11.2a above. -, 3 City of Pickering "' Year 2011 Performance Measurement Report Parks and Recreation 11.3a Operating Costs for Recreation Facilities per Person 2011 2010 $85.96 $86.44 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. In 2011, there was a slight decrease in the general cost of repairs and maintenance and the overall use of materials compared to 2010. However, this decrease was partially offset in the calculation with the use of a lower population count in 2011. • City of Pickering Year 2011 Performance Measurement Report Parks and Recreation 11.3b Total Costs for Recreation Facilities per Person 2011 2010 $100.02 $99.62 Efficiency Measure Total cost for recreation facilities per person. Objective Provide efficient operation of the City's recreation facilities. Detailed Comments Total cost includes operating costs, interest on long term debt and amortization, less revenue from other municipalities for tangible capital assets related to the operation of all recreation programs and facilities. In 2011, a slight increase in the interest on long term debt and amortization expense resulted to a small increase in the calculation of this measure compared to 2010. City of Pickering 7 Year 2011 Performance Measurement Report Parks and Recreation 11.4a Operating Costs for Recreation Programs and Recreation Facilities per Person (Subtotal) 2011 2010 $133.93 $134.20 Efficiency Measure Operating costs for recreation programs and recreation facilities per person. Objective Provide efficient operation of the City's recreation programs and 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. This is the sum of the measures as calculated from 11.2a and 11.3a above. In 2011, the overall decrease was primarily due to the decrease in the operating costs for recreation programs and recreation facilities. As previously noted, this decrease was partially offset by the use of the lower but more accurate population estimate in 2011. The resulting figure however, still came out lower compared to 2010. City of Pickering Year 2011 Performance Measurement Report 1 -' Parks and Recreation 11.4b Total Costs for Recreation Programs and Recreation Facilities per Person (Subtotal) 2011 2010 $147.99 $147.38 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 11.4a above plus interest on long term debt and amortization related to the operation of recreation programs and maintenance of facilities less revenue from other municipalities for tangible capital assets on programs and facilities. This is the sum of items 11.2b and 11.3b above. City of Pickering Year 2011 Performance Measurement Report Parks and Recreation 11.5 Total Kilometres of Trails per 1,000 Persons 2011 2010 0.173 km 0.171 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 City maintained 16 kilometres of trail in both 2011 and in 2010. The increase in the calculated measure was a result of the lower but more accurate population estimate used in 2011 compared to 2010. City of Pickering • Year 2011 Performance Measurement Report 1 3 0 • Parks and Recreation 11.6 Hectares of Open Space and Hectares of Open Space per 1,000 Persons 2011 2010 2.371 ha 2.347 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 over total population 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. In both 2011 and 2010, the City maintained 219 hectares of municipally owned open space. The increase in the calculated figure in 2011 from 2010 was the result of the lower but more accurate population estimate used in 2011. • 131 City of Pickering Year 2011 Performance Measurement Report Parks and Recreation 11.7 Total Participant Hours for Recreation Programs 2011 2010 21,609 hrs 21,030 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. In 2011, a combination of the increase in participant hours from squash and racquetball leagues and the lower population estimate contributed to the increase in the resulting measure as compared to 2010. • City of Pickering 1 3 2 Year 2011 Performance Measurement Report Parks and Recreation 11.8 Square Metres of Indoor Recreation Facilities and Square Metres of Indoor Recreation Facilities per 1,000 Persons (Municipally Owned) 2011 2010 442.066 sqm 437.561 sqm 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. In 2011 , the City maintained 40,831 square meters of municipally owned indoor recreation facilities. This was the same area maintained in 2010. The small increase in the calculated measure in 2011 from 2010 was a result of the lower but more accurate population estimate used (denominator) in the 2011 calculation. City of Pickering Year 2011 Performance Measurement Report Parks and Recreation 11.9 Square Metres of Outdoor Recreation Facility Space and Square Metres of Outdoor Recreation Facility Space per 1,000 Persons (Municipally Owned) 2011 2010 287.872 sqm 284.938 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 2011 was the same as in 2010. The slight increase in the 2011 calculation was a result of the lower but more accurate population estimate in 2011 (denominator) compared to 2010. City of Pickering 1 3 4. Year 2011 Performance.Measurement Report Library Services 12.1a Operating Costs for Library Services per Person 2011 2010 $57.66 $55.27 Efficiency Measure Operating costs for library services per person. Objective Provide efficient library services to the public. Detailed Comments The City has five library locations servicing its residents. The cost for all five locations is included in the calculation of this measure, which includes wages, benefits, materials, rent and all other operating costs divided by total population. The increase in library operating costs per person was due to a slight increase in staff salaries, benefits and maintenance costs due to ageing facilities. The lower but more accurate population estimate for 2011 used in the calculation (denominator) also contributed to the higher resulting measure compared to 2010. °$ ` 5 City of Pickering Year 2011 Performance Measurement Report Library Services 12.1b Total Costs for Library Services per Person 2011 2010 $66.73 $66.83 Efficiency Measure Total costs for library services per person. Objective Provide efficient library services to the public. Detailed Comments Total cost for this 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 2011 from 2010 due to the decrease in the allocated amortization on related capital assets. Although the population estimate used in the calculation (denominator) was lower, the resulting measure still came out slightly lower as compared to 2010. City of Pickering 1 3 6 Year 2011 Performance Measurement Report Library Services 12.2a Operating Costs for Library Services per Use 2011 2010 $1.72 $1.76 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 2011 was slightly lower compared to 2010. Although there was an increase in total operating cost in 2011 (numerator), there was also a corresponding increase in total library uses (denominator) in the same year. 3 : City of Pickering Year 2011 Performance Measurement Report Library Services 12.2b Total Costs for Library Services per Use 2011 2010 $1.99 $2.13 Efficiency 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 2011 resulting measure was due to a lower allocated amortization costs as compared to 2010.. • 12 City of Pickering Year 2011 Performance Measurement Report Library Services 12.3 Library Uses per Person 2011 2010 33.563 31.340 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. The 7.1% increase in total library usage per person in 2011 compared to 2010 was due to a combination of an actual increase in total library usage (numerator) and the use of a lower but more accurate population estimate (denominator) in the calculation. -, 9 City of Pickering I Year 2011 Performance Measurement Report Library Services 12.4 Electronic Library Uses as a Percentage of Total Library Uses 2011 2010 36.2% 28.8% 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 increase in this measure in 2011 from 2010 was due to: a) increase in the number of patrons using public library wireless connection, and b) increase in the number information communication technology, software and social media support requests. City of Pickering .� Year 2011 Performance Measurement Report 1 "4 u Library Services 12.5 Non Electronic Library Uses as a Percentage of Total Library Uses 2011 2010 63.8% 71.2% Effectiveness Measure Non-electronic Library uses as a percentage of total library uses. Objective Effectiveness of information on library usage. Detailed Comments 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 decrease in the resulting measure for 2011 was primarily due to the decrease in the total number of in- person visits made to the library compared to 2010. As a result, all other non-electronic uses decreased as well. • 1 4 l City of Pickering Year 2011 Performance Measurement Report Land Use Planning 13.1 Percentage of New Residential Units Located Within Settlement Areas 2010 2010 99.6% 100.0% 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 2011, there was a total of 566 new dwelling units created within the City's designated settlement areas compared to the 107 created in 2010. This represents a 429% increase in new residential units created compared to 2010. Of the 566 new units, all except two of were created in the urban/settlement area. City of Pickering 1 4 Year 2011 Performance Measurement Report Land Use Planning 13.2 Preservation of Agricultural Lands 2011 2010 100.0% 100.0% 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 and 2011. No area was re-designated to other uses in the reporting year. • 14 City of Pickering Year 2011 Performance Measurement Report Land Use Planning 13.3 Preservation of A ricultural Lands Relative to 2000 2011 2010 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 2011. City of Pickering Year 2011 Performance Measurement Report 1 4 4 Land Use Planning 13A Hectares of Agricultural Land which was Re-designated for Other Uses During the Reporting Year 2011 2010 0 0 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 2011. • 1 4+ r City of Pickering M Year 2011 Performance Measurement Report Land Use Planning 13.5 Hectares of Agricultural Lands which was Re-designated for Other Uses Since 2000 2011 2010 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 since 2000. • ATTACHMENT#,..1_TO REPORT#t;$ 3-/Q City of Pickering • Year 2011 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 pickering.ca as of September 30, 2012 or available at the Corporate Services Department, 2nd Floor, Pickering Civic Complex. Cal/ O Report To Executive Committee KERING Report Number: CST 24-12 Date: September 10, 2012 From: Gillis A. Paterson Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer Subject: Repealing of Debenture By-laws Recommendation: 1. That Report CST 24-12 of the Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer be received; and, 2. That the Draft By-law attached be passed. Executive Summary: This report seeks Council's approval to repeal Debenture By-laws that are no longer required. This is basically a "housekeeping" exercise that most municipalities need to undertake to remove now redundant by-laws. As required for formal borrowing, these debenture by-laws were approved prior to the commencement of the capital projects. However, these Debenture By-laws are no longer required as explained below. Financial Implications: There are no financial implications associated with this report or the repeal of the by-laws. Discussion: Capital projects requiring external borrowing (debentures) are formalized by Council with the enactment of Debenture By-laws prior to the commencement of the projects. With the debenture by-laws and other formal documents in place, the City is ready whenever the Region of Durham decides to go to the market to issue debentures. However, as the projects progress, for various reasons the approved debt may no longer be necessary. This is mainly due to actual amounts needed being lower than originally approved; surplus annual debt charges being redirected to fund the new debt financed projects; excess funds raised from previously completed projects being redirected to the new debt approved projects and the use of internal loans. Surplus annual debt charges occur when the amount provided in the Annual Budget is higher than the actual required at the closing of the year; either due to the Region not proceeding with the debenture issue or a time lag in the City's anticipated requirements. Report CST 24-12 Date: September 10, 2012 Subject: Repealing of Debenture By-laws Page 2 1 4 8 This surplus is being redirected to the new capital projects and therefore avoiding debt charges. Sound fiscal and financial management is essential in order to minimize annual property tax increases, and to reduce burden on taxpayers. Redirecting surplus annual debt charges to new debt approved capital projects will avoid the tax levy impact for the new projects in future years. It also avoids the interest cost. Approvals to undertake the forgoing are provided to the Treasurer under the Municipal Act and through the recommendations contained in the report to Council each year with the annual budget. Other approvals can be found in the Council approved Financial Control Policy. However, only Council can repeal by-laws, hence the need for this report. Attachments: 1. Draft By-law to Repeal Debenture By-laws No Longer Required Prepared By: Approved / Endorsed By: Caryn Kong, CGA Gillis A. Paterson, CMA Senior Financial Analyst - Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer Capital & Debt Management • Recommended for the consideration of Pickering Cit Council J I A 01, 2-012- Tony Prevedel, P.Eng. Chief Administrative Officer PITT ACHMENT#_j__TO REPORT 1 4 ' The Corporation of the City of Pickering By-law No. Being a by-law to repeal debenture by-law nos. 6891/08, 6950/09, 6975/09, 7081/10, 7075/10, 7154/11, 7167/11, 7231/12, and 7232/12 Whereas the Corporation of the City of Pickering passed By-law Nos. 6891/08, 6950/09, 6975/09, 7081/10, 7075/10, 7154/11, 7167/11, 7231/12, and 7232/12 to provide for the issuance of debentures by the Region of Durham for City projects; and Whereas the debenture funding provided for under these by-laws is no longer required. Now therefore the Council of the Corporation of the City of Pickering hereby enacts as follows: Repeal of Existing By-laws 1. By-laws 6891/08, 6950/09, 6975/09, 7081/10, 7075/10, 7154/11, 7167/11, 7231/12, and 7232/12 are hereby repealed Effective Date 2. This by-law shall come into effect on the day of its passing. By-law passed this 18th day of September, 2012. David Ryan, Mayor Debbie Shields, City Clerk city Report to ____t_ete, Executive Committee PICKERING Report Number: CST 25-12 Date: September 10, 2012 I 5 Li • From: Gillis A. Paterson Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer Subject: Cash Position Report as at June 30, 2012 Recommendation: It is recommended that Report CST 25-12 from the Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer be received for information. Executive Summary: The schedules provided presents the City of Pickering's cash position, continuity of taxes receivable, outstanding investments, development charges collected and other development contribution information for the six months ended December 31, 2012. Overall, movement of key indicators in 2011 had been relatively positive compared to 2010 as reflected through the following: • Development charges collected are up by 102% over the same period in 2010 to $4.3M for the City portion which is the highest in 20 years exceeding the 2004 collection of $3.7M. • Building permits issued in 2011 of 782 matched the 2004 record with the most number of permits issued in the past 11 years. • Tax arrears are up by 7.8% over 2010 partially due to the increase in taxation by the Region and City. The City's investment portfolio remains well balanced, posting almost the same yield in both short and long term investments Financial Implications: The financial position of the Corporation for six months ended June 30, 2012 was a net decrease in cash of $22,754,245 to $1,081,100. Sources of Funds totaled $133,163,288 and Uses of Funds totaled $155,917,533. The decrease was mainly due to the timing of receipts and payments to the Region and School Boards as compared to year-end. Discussion: This report presents a six-month period of activity ending June 30, 2012. The discussion below describes the purpose and provides summary information in each of the attached schedules. Report CST 25-12 September 10, 2012 ,Syybject: Cash Position Report as at June 30, 2012 Page 2 ; .. I .) Statement of Cash Position: Attachment 1 reflects the City's sources and uses of funds for the first half of 2012. Subcategories have been identified to highlight those cash transactions that are material in nature or with large dollar values for the City. This schedule summarizes the decrease in cash of $22,754,245 over the first six months of the year. As at June month end, the City had just completed its interim levy and payment-in-lieu of taxes payments to the Region of Durham and to the respective district school boards. Note that comparison of the net increase/(decrease) of cash over the same reporting period in prior years may not be useful due to the timing differences of receipts and disbursements in each respective year. Continuity of Taxes Receivable: Attachment 2 summarizes the tax related transactions from January 1 to June 30, 2012 and provides the outstanding taxes receivable as at June 30, 2012. This balance represents all three levels of taxes billed for the City, Region and School Boards. However, the June balance is not indicative of the true outstanding taxes for the City due to the timing of billings and receipts. The outstanding balance includes the amounts owing for the September 27th residential due date of approximately $31.4M. The commercial final billing has not been billed hence not included in the total. The following is the summary of taxes receivable: Current year as at June 30,2012: • Taxes receivable at Jan 1/12: $13.6M • Taxes billed to date: $149.4M (excludes final commercial final billing) • Taxes paid: $105.7M • Taxes receivable at Jun 30/12: $57.3M All years as at June 30, 2012: • Total taxes receivable at Jan 1/12: $18.3M • Taxes billed to date: $149.4M (excludes final commercial final billing) • Taxes paid: $109.4M • Taxes receivable at Jun 30/12: $57.7M Outstanding Investments: Attachment 3 reflects the short- and long-term investments for both Current and Reserve Funds outstanding as at June 30, 2012. Total investment portfolio as at June 30, 2012 is $74.8M with $0.8M from internal loans and $74.0M from general investments. This represents an increase of about $4.9M or 7.0% on total investments from the same period last year. Total investments vary from year to year depending on the timing of collection and remittance of development charges and supplementary taxes. Development Charges Collected: The City is responsible for the collection of development charges on behalf of all levels of government. Attachment 4 shows the total amounts collected for the City, Region and School Boards. Total charges collected for the year as at June 30, 2012 was $7.3M. This was up by 73.8% as compared to the $4.2M development charges collected over the same period in 2011. Report CST 25-12 September 10, 2012 Subject: Cash Position Report as at June 30, 2012 Page 3 I Note that the total collection as reported under the Sources of Funds on Attachment 1 does not match the remittance amounts to the Region and School Boards indicated under the Use of Funds also in Attachment 1. This variance is a result of timing differences in payments to the Region and School Boards as monies become due 25 days following the month of collection. Other Development Contributions: Attachment 5 is provided to show other significant development contributions received in 2012. Multi Year Receipts: The balance of the Attachments shows multiyear receipts of the City's portion of development charges as presented on a linear chart. Total amount collected for the year as at June 30, 2012 was $2.6M. This was the highest first half of the year collection surpassing the previous high of $2.4M recorded in the first half of 2004. Together with the record high second half of the year collection of $3.0M in December 2011, the economic activity around the City is on the upswing. Similarly, the 503 building permits issued in the first half of 2012 was the highest issuance during the same period in the last five years. Again, a positive indicator of economic growth in the City. Attachments:. 1. Statement of Cash Position 2. Continuity of Taxes Receivable 3. Outstanding Investments 4. Development Charges Collected 5. Other Development Contributions 6. City Portion of Development Charges Collected 2003 — 2012 (semi-annual) 7. Building Permits Issued 2000 — 2012 (semi-annual) Prepared By: Approved/Endorsed By: OPP r _ • "`_ �lll �, Dennis P. Arboleda Gillis A. Paterson,CM Supervisor, Accounting Services Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer !.-.1Re3 port CST 25-12 September 10, 2012 Subject: Cash Position Report as at June 30, 2012 Page 4 Recommended for the consideration of Pickering City Council /446, 27, 101,.. • Tony Prevedel, P.Eng. Chief Administrative Officer • ATTACHMENT#_1.._TO REPORT# ! City of Pickering Statement of Cash Position for six months ending June 30, 2012 1 4 Sources of Funds: Accounts Receivable collected $ 732,151 Development charges collected 1 7,252,147 Operating 7,887,716 Grants-in-lieu: Federal 1,234,553 Provincial 344,686 Ontario enterprises 4,545,061 Municipal enterprises 165,316 Linear Properties Federal specific grants 61,456. Ontario specific grants 41,256 Interest Income 151,012 Tax payments received 110,747,934 Total $ 133,163,288 Use of Funds: Operating and Capital Expenditures $ 47,932,184 • Payroll 18,029,086' Region Levy 64,223,486 Regional portion of Dev. Charges 4,508,727 School Board Levies 20,219,416 School Board portion of Dev. Charges 381,016 Debenture payment to Region 623,618 Total $ 155,917,533 Net Cash Increase(Decrease) $ (22,754,245) FINANCIAL POSITION Bank Balance Net Cash Bank Balance July 1,2011 Provided (Used) December 31,2011 Current Fund $ 23,835,345 $ (22,754,245) $ 1,081,100 TOTAL $ 23,835,345 $ (22,754,245) $ 1,081,100 1 Includes City, Region and School Boards 01 @ N CO CD # CO m # # N # CD n' C q a) / / 7 / \ % CD C \ 2 g > N r _ N n o •f U) o CO n # � U) v ° k 2 & $ / 2 $ 7 / 03 7 q R NI § 2 ? N ~ U) 4- re c t >. § n U CO £ N ¥ o \ CO r @ N N ¥ CO � • c a o N ¥ 7 r N q q = ' 0 C e c A- 6 0 o r o - co CD a © & - co CO N CD N VI CI ■ c $ / . E U) C 0 0 > C 2 o E 0 . & U x 7 _ D 0 / $ / N q 7 N C cc / c C CD C) N E a D B _ TS « / Z" 2 N / / § - 7Nƒ CD m ) § / § u_a ~ R 2 R / \ \ U fr ,7 ■ ) \ / q £ 69' CO k § / % as E 0) 772 / / - 2 = m / 2 % E E m 2 7 CO 2 E N 2 % 6 0 .$ g 6 0 U > Z < \ ? \ 2 2 G / / c e g w- § = = E CD 0. a c c 2 � / 3 $ co o co r # CD # N CO Cl.) S CD CD N E \ \ ? CO k N 2 / % ~ © 7 / $ E / > _ ¥ co OD n G G r CO CO a) § CD N N t k - n \ % � ) k % / kk § / k k 2 17)' E. / y e k a) m E k / - - £. f f - / uk 7 C C C C § R \ d @ @ ar (a L - ._ / >- G \ G as $ g $ 5 / $ 2 / 2 e § § •- A E o A % o A § § E I- N k : \ R a 7 R a 7 R a 8@ a •C w a Q \ $as 0 N N N 0- 1- N R CO ATTACHMENT#-3 TO REPORT#L.. 5--i an U) N 0 O o 0 0 0 0 0 o 0 O O o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O pm O O O O O O O O O CO O O O O O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O C 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O CD (7 0 0 0 0 0 0 u) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 r a. 4) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 V 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 'Ct et N N R r 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O N O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O Ch C7 W N't CO 7 n CO M 7 Nr of M V V O V o V CD N O O of u N CO to O of ✓ / M ao n CO 0 rn CO v m CD C) LO co W v C) rn co 0 v o) v o o) v 0 d ; r 0 CO O-u) LA O N O u1 TD r r CO v v n n n N O O7 co n u) V a0 0) O C C > r C0 CO n Ci O n r N N N N N 4' r N N N r u N ca ca 7 > C) CO cn Eft -CO te C co r (D o N N ow 0 } T c7 N Ea 0 O DO N N NOnoWOOW � c7 a. j N ,� 0,5 d W Q a W U a Q Z ❑ r a N U) otf r CO °a ❑ Co N • � ad mwZ WCCMI 03 • 0?) IX 00 c0 I- 00 u) N WOW ,- 00 . - 0 "" O N u o!1 n 00 ❑ CC 0 2 cc' CC N CD Q N N N CO n Cr) u) CO N C �' Q Q Z Q O Q Q J Q Z a Q < Z Q Q a)al co coaoono (tONttOC`no c., ❑ 2��(nm (A2O -uaicnM Via " y d V NCI CO O r V N O Z Q . Q 0 w Q W c0 00 ui o(o v n N C7 ui 4- O Q Q Q F- F- a z Cn a Q th Q Q F" •c c� c? t.l rr rr .� p ❑ ❑ ❑ zQZ ❑ dwdZ ❑ 000Z E CL iozzzamazDF- wazzzza - Q mmmo ? om00zcnammmmo ~ E9 00 (D O N .7 CA N 01 n N 0 O N CO I, N O N to CO .1 V 0 N N O 01 N CO 01 0 V Ch n u) •- 00 W V d' r n O C7 W to 0 r C') V (D N O C') .O•fA CC) D) (D O N n Ni oi n O O r W C i O CO O) C) 6 E co 00 0 N C) V CD CO o CO to n 0 O W CO u N N 0 N 0 CO n CO N V 0 CI) CO r V n CO V' u) O CO 0 V 0 (C W C) CO r v r' CO C CO n V CA O CA W W CU Cn O N u) r O CO CD r u) O V N V n ai O 0 CO E 7 O CO O n O n A N n CP O O N R O u n O 00 A N CD C) V 01 0 rIl 0 N r co o) u V' O r O Cn V to r C') to CD CI) 0 to CO O 0 CD 00 CD V: CO. V O 00 Q .- - N CO n o c n c r r N oi N C7 N N' N N N N r r M n C CO 69 CO 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 . 0 0 •0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o 0 0 0 0 0 o 0 0 0 o o o 0 O V V O U) D) O n CO N u) 7 N Cn O O O O u) O O O u) u) N C) d O O r Ui CD W W W O CD CO n r I,- W N 0 V r N 0 r CO r V r co 0 To D) tCl u) 0 0 0 0 0 0 to N u) V '7 V u) .! N M N C) Q CM N M of n •. C C N N N N N N N N N CO V N C9 CO CO 'V' CO .cf V to CO n Cn (C) LO CD 0 in Z7 Ch p_ > a- m tT Q fl. C a > C a C a O. a U a O O O O -O. 7 7 O O 7 O 0 7 O O O C0 N O O O CO O O O Q CO CO • (n z ? u. 2 7 2 2 co to 2 2 (n ❑ w Iii 0 O CO Z CO CA O N M O Q o N (O o p) N 6 00 O 00 00 CA CO O 00 C70 in 00 N N N r 0 0 O O N O O O O O >- N N N N.N N N N N 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 N N N N C C a >.. >. T C C U c a >. U U U U fa C N d a a O (0 O O CO O as CU CU 7 7 O O a% N O) D O W v ` N o 0 .-7 1-- r•- O CO cv 0 0 0 N N o N O 0. cn U) F- W W W 0 H CC a I- 0 0 Z 00 D F - -p p a CL Z Z ❑ CC W W 0 W J J CC w y To w o zZ 00 OwtF- 001- w W00o0 0 C = 0 w ❑ ❑ - mz CCF- wOm QOCCCC CCQ zQF- . tcor z F- QOOQQ _, En QO ❑ Z Q Q ZF- F- < < cc e c wa ¢ mmmmm H cD0 ZFZF5ZZZ00ZZ pZ CO n' U. do ❑ Z ❑ ❑ ZZ w y00= 0 0Q0002200y 0 ° 1.- Ti E `lw QZZQQ EtoQYw0wau_ U U U_ U U U L1 X w a ymZ ?< Qmppmm awpz OaOw000000000 LL 2 co II a)us 0 us Z > Om00u)) mmccncn U) F-- cOZC 0000000Z Z OO Z OO F- o W c° 0 2 cp m Z CC m > Z - CO Q ❑ CC ❑ m m CC CC CC Q Q CC CC Q CC 2 Ili .. n 5 1- mQwmmLLL z w � M0E- aF- aCC aaammaa Uam Z N c In N LL ¢ U) LL 2 Z E al r Z O w w > CC w .'O O N C N N N N rC C o C > N N N N N N N y cn Cn N N Co co N co W Z ac c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c F- O > d > > > > > > > > > [C y ur > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 0 CO c .- a ¢ mmmmmmmmmm p a prmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm z w z ZN m o = = = z z = z S =H aaaB15 aro � N H _ aa .o =a .n .5 :5 s a .5 a a a a .= a c cc d C0NN NN N N d CIN N N d N N N N d d C CD O) N O 0 Q a ` CO ) N N Q .. Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z f z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Q 7 0 0 (_/) 0 0-I O ATTACHMENT#. 4 TO REPORT# Z aS-/a 1 h 7 a1 '0 N a O �% d a) N w 03 . w O a- 00 N 0 N UM o � O r v ui F- O CO CO N N. 0 N 7 N N N n - 7 V s c U -0 c 0 d) o E us E t o N O 00 co c7 a) Q- -1 0mE CO p r rn CO m tt Q^, O ci O r . T - r 0 ci in ,X^ 0 N N L O m co r O O co O O O N N- E O N T co n co t r r N 3 V 0 Cl) E c4 E. r O O r 0 N co co co QM)„ O 64 00 0 O) C CO 6 7r C N Nt. ■() N_ o r r r a) a) IL M C O co co c`) N 00 U) N a 4)o O co 0 ID (0 CI °' CI) N N r N C) 0 W I- C) W J J 0 ' C.) ?, I- a J Q = - i C >` C 1-2 u _2 Q 2 -3 Oi o_ as as a) as a ATTACHMENT#,__TO REPORT# -;S 1 ' s v TM CO N 0 Lo C C o M••o N 0 ta V g v� o o 0 U c E a c TD • 0 0 tx O 0 D - c 0 0 J co i > J U) >U , Z O c 7 F. C1 a- � a ' m U F Q Z f' O 0 U ATTACHMENT TO REPORT S/ I \ 9 co tti * / _ A / r"= k / '" 0 . \ N2k . a _CZL 3 7ƒ / / A = 2� $ } \ N_ / /& =m/ A \ %\ k . r£ A .1- \ 2 7 cy @ . ~. . . . i- _ CO o r e" \ _ 0 • ~C-J 220 o ■ oi / _ ®_ c c @ ,v- + ¥ o ° (/)I-, . = k O.• 0 C / = 2 22 \ k q _ _ 5 a\ / o c, . - > 2 k • . \ ®_ � \ 7/ ƒ \ . ~Sr �k � \ _ . / : _� q / - � m c • \ / N 2 2\ 2 r= a \ E \ S E S 2 E OR 0 o d d 0 d e o 0 0 0 E 0 0 09 in 0 k k e r4 t . ATTACHMENT#,7TO REPORT#.0 T,S-1 c2 14 n • • 0 _ CDC a; N C c/ N`- .1= r n p _ �} t 1 n o V C d w M_ O CD Y n c"> 0 CU O m N . z n-D - O C‘.1_ .. i \ T - O c,J I O C •-;,) o - ate+ T Nom = N o _ o 05 N 1 °N = do r- t.- �° N - d'in ru � N _ ://),,,,,,,71.3. CD N m a N g CA • r cn ti o) Fc C- 6 CF)p- O cJ N N O 0 • o ca 0 0 o a o o a CI 0 0 C'l rn ° ° on t o N a m C • [ ` °. ° - • • • , Executive Committee T� PIT CKERI V T1�T G Report Number: CST 26-12 1 6 ; Date: September 10, 2012 From: Gillis A. Paterson Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer Subject: Tender/ Contract Approval - Council's Summer Recess • Recommendation: 1. That Report CST 26-12 of the Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer regarding tender and contract approvals during Council's 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-1-2012 Architectural & Engineering Design Services New Operations Centre, Tender No. T-2-2012 Liverpool Road Reconstruction, Tender No. T-7-2012, Supply and Installation of Sports Field Lighting Dunmoore Park Softball • Field #1, Tender No. T-14-2012 Rosebank South Park Landscape Construction, Tender No. T-18-2012, West Shore Boulevard Road Improvements and Provincial Vendor of Record (VOR) - Ricoh Print Management Proposal and Purchase of Print Management Software. 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 the Capital Budget and in Report CST 21-12 for debt financing. No. RFP-1-2012 Net Project Costs under (over) Approved Funds $356,286.00 No. T-2-2012 Net Project Costs under (over) Approved Funds $385,609.00 No. T-7-2012 Net Project Costs under (over) Approved Funds $ 28,393.60 No. T-14-2012 Net Project Costs under (over) Approved Funds $ 23,207.00 No. T-18-2012 Net Project Costs under (over) Approved Funds $178,846.00 Provincial VOR Estimated (over) Current Annual Costs ($ 4,903.60) Report CST 26-12 Date: September 10, 2012 Subject: Tender/ Contract Approval Page 2 - Council's Summer Recess 1 6 2 Discussion: Purchasing Policy Item 07 authorizes the Chief Administrative Officer to . act on behalf of Council in approving an award of a project, and the Treasurer is authorized to approve financing for same, during any recess, break or absence of City Council, on the condition that: (a) The project is in a budget approved by Council; (b) Such actions are in compliance with the Purchasing Policy and the Financial Control Policy; (c) The project is not debt financed; and (d) A report respecting those approvals is subsequently submitted to Council. Circumstances were such that two proposals and four tenders required approval by the Chief Administrative Officer during Council's summer 2012 recess. It is recommended that Council receive this Report for information and ratify the approval of Request for Proposal No. RFP-1-2012 Architectural Design Services New Operations Centre, Tender No. T-2-2012 Liverpool Road Reconstruction, Tender No. T-7-2012 Supply and Installation of.Sports Field Lighting Dunmoore Park, Tender No. T-14-2012 Rosebank South Park Landscape Construction and Tender No. T-18-2012 West Shore Boulevard Road Improvements. In addition, with the expiry of the current photocopier contract, a review of all photocopiers, printers, scanners and faxes was undertaken utilizing the selection of the Province of Ontario Vendor of Record, Ricoh Canada Inc. 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-1-2012, Architectural & Engineering Design Services, New Operations Centre The highest ranking proposal submitted by Rounthwaite, Dick and Hadley Architects Inc. (RDH). in the amount of $1,084,125 plus HST be approved. Financial Implications: 1. Proposal Amount Proposal No. RFP-1-2012 — Rounthwaite Dick & Hadley $1,084,125.00 HST (13%) 140,936.25 Gross Estimated Amount $1,225,061.25 HST Rebate (11.24%) (121 ,855.65) Net Cost $1,103,205.60 • Report CST 26-12 Date: September 10, 2012 Subject: Tender/ Contract Approval Page 3 1 6 3, - Council's Summer Recess u� 2. Approved Source of Funds Operations Centre — Municipal Garage Capital Budget Project Code Source of Funds Budget Required 5315.1201.6181 Debt— 20 year $1 ,475,000.00 $1,120,000.00 5315.1201.6181 Property Taxes 0.00 839.72 5315.1201.6181 Development Charges 25,000.00 22,874.28 Reserve Fund Total $1,500,000.00 $1,143,714.00 3. Estimated Project Cost Summary Request for Proposal RFP-1-2012 $1,084,125.00 Miscellaneous Tender Costs 2,000.00 Contingency Architectural Services 32,808.00 Total $1,123,933.00 HST (13%) 146,111.00 Gross Project Cost 1,270,044.00 HST Rebate (11.24%) (126,330.00) Net Project Cost $1,143,714.00 Net Project Costs under (over) Approved Funds $356,286.00 Tender No. T-2-2012, Liverpool Road, Road Reconstruction and Storm Sewer Work Annland Street to Ilona Park Road The low bid submitted by Wyndale Paving Company Limited for Tender No. T-2-2012 in the amount of $547,630.43 (HST included) be approved. Financial Implications: 1. Tender Amount • Tender T-2-2012 $484,628.70 HST (13%) 63,001.73 Sub-Total 547,630.43 HST Rebate (11.24%) (54,472.27) Total $493,158.16 2. Approved Source of Funds Roads Capital Budget Location Project Source of Funds Budget Required Code Liverpool Road 5320.1120 Debt 10 Year $950,000.00 $560,000.00 Internal Loan Reconstruction & Storm Property Taxes 0 4,391 .00 Sewer Work—Annland Street to Ilona Park Rd. Total $950,000.00 $564,391.00 Report CST 26-12 Date: September 10, 2012 Subject: Tender/ Contract Approval Page 4 - Council's Summer Recess 1 6 4 3. Estimated Project Costing Summary Tender T-2-2012 Liverpool Road, Road Reconstruction and $484,629.00 Storm Sewer Work—Annland Street to Ilona Park Road Materials Testing 10,000.00 Miscellaneous Costs 10,000.00 Contingency 50,000.00 Sub Total — Costs 554,629.00 HST (13%) 72,102.00 Total Gross Project Costs 626,731.00 HST Rebate (11.24%) (62,340.00) Total Net Project Costs $564,391.00 Net Project Costs (over) under Approved Funds $385,609.00 Tender No. T-7-2012, Tender for Supply and Installation of Sports Field Lighting — Dunmoore Park, Softball Field #1 The low bid Option C submitted by Wayne Electric Company Limited for Tender No. T-7-2012 in the amount of $174,133.00 (HST included) be approved. • Financial Implications: 1. Tender Amount Request for Tender No. T-7-2012 $154,100.00 HST (13%) 20,033.00 Sub-Total 174,133.00 HST Rebate (11.24%) (17,320.84) Total $156,812.16 • 2. Approved Source of Funds Parks Capital Budget— Dunmoore Park Project Code Source of Funds Budget Required 5780.1205.6181 Federal Gas Tax $ 30,000.00 $ 30,000.00 5780.1205.6181 Donations 20,000.00 20,000.00 5780.1205.6181/5780.1112.6181 Invest in Ontario 94,606.40 Grant $123,000.00 5780.1112.6181 Parkland Reserve 20,000.00 20,000.00 Fund Sub Total $193,000.00 $164,606.40 Additional Donations 0 15,000.00 Total $193,000.00 $179,606.40 Report CST 26-12 Date: September 10, 2012 Subject: Tender/ Contract Approval Page 5 1 ; 5 - Council's Summer Recess 3. Estimated Project Costing Summary Tender No. T-7-2012 $154,100.00 Consultant Fees 6,100.00 Miscellaneous & Tender Costs 1,300.00 • Contingency 15,000.00, Sub Total $176,500.00 HST (13%) 22,945.00 Total Project Cost 199,445.00 HST Rebate (11.24%) (19,838.60) Total Net Project Cost 11794606.40 Net Project Costs under (over) Approved Funds $28,393.60 Tender No. T-14-2012 - Rosebank South Park Landscape Construction The low bid submitted by Colpac Construction Inc. for Tender No. T-14-2012 in the amount of $139,635.23 (HST included) be approved. Financial Implications: 1. Tender Amount T-14-2012 $123,571.00 HST (13%) 16.064.23 Sub-Total 139,635.23 HST Rebate (11 .24%) (13,889.38) Total $125,745.85 2. Approved Source of Funds - 2012 Parks Capital Budget Location Project Code Source of Budget Required Funds Rosebank South 5780.1221.6129 Parkland $250,000.00 $191,793.00 Park Landscape Reserve Fund Construction 5780.1221.6129 Third Party $0.00 $35,000.00 Contributions R.F. (7501.0091) Total Funds Required $250,000.00 $226,793.00 Report CST 26-12 Date: September 10, 2012 Subject: Tender/ Contract Approval Page 6 - Council's Summer Recess 1 6 6 3. Estimated Project Costing Summary T-14-2012 —Tender for Rosebank South Park Landscape Construction $123,571.00 Miscellaneous & Tender Costs 1,500.00 Replacement of Fence along Rail line 8,958.00 Pre-purchase of Trees and Shrubs 15,542.00 Structural Engineering Consultant Fees 2,300.00 Playground Structures and Safety Surfacing 45,000.00 Materials Testing Allowance 1,000.00 Contingency 25.000.00 Total 222,871.00 HST (13%) 28,973.00 Total Gross Project Cost 251,844.00 HST Rebate (11.24%) (25,051.00) Total Net Project Cost $226,793.00 Net Project Cost (over) Under Approved Funds $23,207.00 Tender No. T-18-2012, West Shore Boulevard, Road Improvements, Oklahoma Drive to Sunrise Avenue The low bid submitted by Wyndale Paving Company Limited for Tender No. T-18-2012 in the amount of $448,780.57 (HST included) be approved. Financial Implications: 1. Tender Amount Tender No. T-18-2012 $397,150.95 HST (13%) 51,629.62 Gross Tender Amount 448,780.57 HST Rebate (11.24%) (44,639.77) • Net Tender Amount $404,1140.80 Report CST 26-12 Date: September 10, 2012 Subject: Tender/ Contract Approval Page 7 7 - Council's Summer Recess 2. Approved Source of Funds Roads and External Subdivision Capital Budget Location Project Code Source of Budget Required Funds Tender No. T-18- 5320.1118.6250 Debt 10 Year $330,000.00 $0.00 2012 West Shore 5320.1118.6250 Internal Loan-10 Boulevard Year 0.00 275,000.00 5320.1118.6250 Property Taxes 0.00 1,213.00 5320.1118.6250 Development Charges 0.00 14,478.50 West Shore Reserve Fund Boulevard-Storm (33.7%) Sewer Works 5320.1118.6250 0.00 28,484.50 (Growth Related) City's Share DC Reserve West Shore (66.3%) Boulevard-Storm Sewer Works (Growth Related) (4) Oil Grit 5321.1107.6253 City's Share DC 270,000.00 118,780.20 Separators Reserve (90%) 5321.1107.6253 Development 30,000.00 13,197.80 Charges Reserve Fund (10%) Total 30 000.00_ $451,154.00 Report CST 26-12 Date: September 10, 2012 Subject: Tender/ Contract Approval Page 8 - Council's Summer Recess 1 6 LY 3. Breakdown of Cost-West Shore Boulevard and Oil Grit Separators West Shore Blvd Oil Grit Separators Total Improvements Project Code 5320.1118.6250 5321.1107.6253 Budget $330,000.00 $300,000.00 $630,000.00 Estimated Project Cost Tender No. T-18-2012 279,456.00 117,695.00 397,151.00 Associated Cost: Miscellaneous, Tender& 6,200.00 6,200.00 Material Testing Contingency 28,000.00 12,000.00 40.000.00 Total Cost 313,656.00 129,695.00 443,351.00 HST (1.76%) 5,520.00 2,283.00 7.803.00 Net Project Cost to City 319,176.00 131,978.00 451,154.00 Net Position (Over) $10,824.00 $168,022.00 $178,846.00. Under 4. Breakdown of Growth Related & Improvements Works at West Shore Boulevard City's Work - New - Growth Total Improvements Related Tender Amount 241,156.00 . 38,300.00 279,456.00 Misc & Material 6,200.00 6,200.00 Testing Contingency 24,080.00 3,920.00 28,000.00 Total 271,436.00 42,220.00 313,656.00 New HST Cost to 4,777.00 743.00 5,520.00 City (1 .76%) Net Project Cost to 276,213.00 42,963.00 319,176.00 City Report CST 26-12 Date: September 10, 2012 Subject: Tender/ Contract Approval Page 9 6 - Council's Summer Recess 5. Estimated Project Costing Summary Tender No. T-18-2012 West Shore Boulevard, Road $397,151.00 Improvements —Oklahoma Drive to Sunrise Avenue Materials Testing 5,000.00 Miscellaneous Costs 1 ,200.00 Contingency 40,000.00 Sub Total — Costs 443,351.00 HST (13%) 57,636.00 Total Gross Project Costs 500,987.00 HST Rebate (11.24%) (49,833.00) Total Net Project Costs 4 1 154.00 Net Project Costs (over) under Approved Funds $178,846.00 Provincial VOR -Ricoh Print Management Proposal and Purchase of Print Management Software That the proposal received from Ricoh Canada, based on the terms of Standing Agreement VOR-1027 from the Ministry of Government Services of the Province of Ontario for the provision of multi-function devices and printers be accepted. Financial Implications: 1. Current Annual Cost Annual contract cost—Toshiba— 21 single function $28,000.00 photocopiers Annual HP Printer Cost — 187 units — Consumables 49,000.00 Annual HP Printer Repair Costs 3,600.00 Annual Cost to upgrade existing copiers 6,000.00 Current annual paper cost 27,500.00 Estimated annual energy cost 950.00 Current Annual Cost $115.050.00 2. Proposed Annual Contract Cost - Ricoh Annual cost— Equipment - $5,065.12 per month x 12 months $60,781.44 Estimated annual total cost per copy (CPC) - $5,022.68 per 60,272.16 month x 12 months Current annual paper cost 27.500.00 Total Annual Cost $148.553.60 Report CST 26-12 Date: September 10, 2012 • Subject: Tender/ Contract Approval Page 10 - Council's Summer Recess 1 7 0 3. Estimated Net Annual Increase Net Increase $33,503.60 Less —estimate annual HP printer repairs (3,600'.00) Less —estimated annual HP printer replacement (five year (21,000.00) average) Less —estimated saving paper cost (4,000.00) Less—energy savings TBD Estimated net annual contract cost increase $4.903.60 4. Print Management Software Print Management Software — One time cost only $34,960.00 Savings 2012 — scanner not required (3,000.00) Systems scan for credit card numbers underexpenditure (7,000.00) Back up Tape Replacements — not required (1,000.00) GIS —to be rebudgeted in 2013 as a larger project (23,960.00) Net additional one time cost 0 Attachments: 1. Directive Memorandum dated July 11, 2012, Resolution No. 100/12 2. Community Services Memorandum, July 26, 2012 3. Community Services Memorandum, July 19, 2012 4. Community Services Memorandum, July 27, 2012 5. Community Services Memorandum, July 25, 2012 6. Community Services Memorandum, August 5, 2012 7. Corporate Services Memorandum, August 3, 2012 Prepared By: Approved / Endorsed By: Vera A. Felgemacher Gillis A. Paterson, C.M.A. C.P.P., CPPO, CPP:, C.P.M., CMM III Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer Manager, Supply & ervices GAP:vaf Copy: Chief Administrative Officer Report CST 26-12 Date: September 10, 2012 Subject: Tender/ Contract Approval Page 11 1 7 1 - Council's Summer Recess Recommended for the consideration of Pickering Cit Council Tony Prevedel, P.Eng. Chief Administrative Officer ATTACHMENT#_TO REPORT# --� Legal and Legislative Services 1 ; 2 Clerk's Office Directive Memorandum July 11, 2012 . To: Gil Paterson Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer From Debbie Shields City Clerk Subject: Direction as per Minutes of the Special Meeting of City Council held on July 9, 2012 Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer, Report CST 21-12 Approval of Debt Financing and Internal Loans for Council Approved Capital Projects to be Undertaken During the Summer Recess of Council Council Decision Resolution #100/12 1. That Report CST 21-12 of the Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer regarding:. a) approval of debt financing for the West Short Boulevard Road Improvements - Oklahoma Drive to Sunrise Avenue, Liverpool Road Reconstruction and Storm Sewer Work- Annland Street to Ilona Park Drive, and Architectural Services for the new Operations Centre projects to be undertaken during the summer recess. of Council; and b) approval of internal loans for the Ultraviolet Disinfection System and Pipe Repairs-Dunbarton Pool, and Library-Radio Frequency Identification System (RFID) projects to be undertaken'and awarded during the summer recess of Council be received. • 2. That Council authorize the Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer to finance the projects as follows: • a) the sum of$330,000 for the West Short Boulevard Road Improvements - Oklahoma Drive to Sunrise Avenue as provided for in the 2011 Capital Budget be financed by the issue of debentures by the Regional Municipality of Durham over a period not to exceed ten years at a rate to be determined; 1r7 Subject: Directive Memorandum July 11, 2012 Page 2 b) the sum of$950,000 for the Liverpool Road Reconstruction and Storm Sewer Work - Annland Street to Ilona Park Drive to be financed by the issue of debentures by the Regional Municipality of Durham over a period.not to exceed ten years at a rate to be determined as provided for in the 2011 Capital Budget; c) the sum of$1,475,000 for the Architectural Services for the new Operations Centre as provided for in the 2012 Capital Budget be financed by the issuance of debentures by the Regional Municipality of Durham or an internal loan for a period not to exceed 20 years or from the proceeds of the sale of City owned • land; d) the sum of up to $125,000 for the Ultraviolet Disinfection System and Pipe Repairs-Dunbarton Indoor Pool as provided for in the 2012 Capital Budget be financed by an internal loan for a period of up to 5 years or from other funds as are available at the discretion of the Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer; e) the sum of up to $250,000 for the Library-RFID as provided for in the 2012 Capital Budget be financed by an internal loan for a period of up to 5 years or from other funds as are available at the discretion of the Director, Corporate Services& Treasurer; f) the annual repayment charges in the amount of approximately$350,000 be included in the annual Current Budget for the City of Pickering commencing in 2013, continuing thereafter until the loans are repaid, and any financing costs be paid out of the Current Budget; and g) the Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer be authorized to take any actions necessary at his discretion in order to give effect to the foregoing including the issuance of internal loans in lieu of debt for any or all of the above projects; 3. That the Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer be authorized to provide any additional funding required from sources available through the 2012 Budgets and in the Financial Control Policy; 4. That the draft by-laws attached to this report be enacted; and 5. That the appropriate City of Pickering Officials be authorized to take necessary action to give effect hereto. Please take any action deemed necessary. 5. ItkiJAD Debbie Shields /Ir RECEIVED CITY OF PICKERING ATTACHMENT#_ _TO REPORT# 'rt v AUG 022012 174. Office of the CAO 2 eni;171:':1.!41 -11#. "P L SAND SERVICES Received JUG.. 3 1 201 SWAZINIZIE File Follow Up Mayor Corn Sery To: Tony Prevedel Council C&R July 26, 2012 Chief Administrative Officer Directors Eng Services SMT Oper & Fac From: Everett Buntsma Clerk Corp Services Director, Community Services Fire Office Sustain Human Res Plan & Dev Copy: Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer Legal & Ls Division Head, Engineering Services Manager, Operations & Fleet Services Manager, Supply & Services Senior Financial Analyst Capital & Debt Management Subject: Proposal No. RFP-1-2012 Architectural & Engineering Design Services New Operations Centre Selection of Architect - File: A-1440 Recommendation: • 1. That this memo of the Director, Community Services, regarding the hiring of an architectural firm for the design, site planning and tender document preparation for the new Operations Centre be received; 2. That proposal No. RFP-1-2012 submitted by Rounthwaite Dick and Hadley Architects Inc. (RDH) in the amount of$1,084,125.00 (plus HST) be accepted and a net proposal cost of 1,103,205.60 (net of HST rebate) be approved; 3. That the total gross project cost of$1,270,044.00 (HST included) and a net project cost of $1,143,714.00 (net of HST rebate), including the proposed amount and other associated costs be approved; 4. That the Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer finance the project as follows: a) the sum of$1,120,000.00 be debt financed, or through an internal loan, or from the proceeds of the sale of City owned land; b) the sum of$22,874.28 be funded from Development Charges Reserve Funds and; c) the balance of$839.72 be funded from property taxes; d) the Treasurer be authorized to make any changes, adjustments, and revisions to 1 7 , amounts, terms, conditions, or take any actions necessary in order to effect the foregoing; and • 5. That the appropriate City of Pickering officials be authorized to take necessary action to give effect thereto. • • Executive Summary: The existing Operations Centre is located on Tillings Road in the Duffin Heights neighbourhood, and is in part, affecting the ability to construct and occupy a new residential development. The need for relocation to a new site was identified in 2007, and a Feasibility Study was undertaken in 2009. AECOM substantially completed the Feasibility Study and Environmental Assessment in 2010/11, and it was determined that the only viable site was a 10.18ha (25.15 acre) parcel at 1955 Clements Road. Council approved the acquisition of this parcel which was acquired in early 2012, and we now must move forward with the design and construction to promote the development of the Duffin Heights plan. Further, the existing Operations Centre has reached its useful life cycle as it is over 35 years old and does not meet all of the requirements associated with current advanced technologies and regulations for noise abatement, soil protection, winter control operations and methodology, and energy management under regulation 397/11. In accordance with Purchasing Policy Item 07.01, the Chief Administrative Officer is authorized to act on behalf of Council during Council recess in approving an award of a project, and the Treasurer is authorized to approve financing for same. Financial Implications: 1. Request for Proposal Amount 084 125.00 Request for Proposal No. RFP-1-2012— Rounthwaite Dick & Hadley $1,084,125.00 HST (13%) $1,225,061.25 Gross Estimated Amount ,(121,855.65) 5,061.25 HST Rebate (11.24%) $1,103,205.60 Net Cost Page 2 July 26, 2012 Proposal No. RFP-1-2012 Architectural & Engineering Design Services New Operations Centre Selection of Architect. n c-j 2. Approved Source of Funds I ! Operations Centre — Municipal Garage Capital Budget Budget Required Project Code Source of Funds $1,475,000.00 $1,120,000.00 5315.1201.6181 Debt — 20 year 0.00 839.72 5315.1201.6181 Property Taxes 5315.1201.6181 Development Charges Reserve 25,000.00, 22,874.28 Fund Total $1,500,000.00 $1,143,714.00 3. Estimated Project Cost Summary 084,125.00 Request for.Proposal RFP-1-2012 $1,084,000.00 Miscellaneous Tender Costs 32,808.00 Contingency Architectural Services $1,123,933.00 Total � 146,111.00 HST (13%) 1,270,044.00 Gross Project Cost (126,330.00) HST Rebate (11.24%) $1,143,714.00(126,3 00) Net Project Cost Net Project Costs under (over) Approved Funds $356,286.00 It is necessary to report to Council on projects requiring debt financing or internal loans in order to formalize the borrowing. RFP-1-2012 will be awarded in the summer after Council has recessed, and as a result reporting to Council to include debt financing was not possible. In order to formalize this debt before the Council recess, Recommendation 2 c) of Report to Council CST 21-12 dated July 9, 2012 approved the maximum debt financing in the amount of $1,475,000 based on the 2012 approved Capital Budget. The debt financing together with $25,000 to be funded from the Development Charges Reserve Fund provides for a maximum funding of$1.5 million for this project which includes consulting and design of a new Operations Centre. RFP-1-2012 as reported in this memo pertains to the Architecture & Engineering Services for the new Operations Centre. Based on the magnitude of this project, it will also require project management services for managing through to completion. The balance of the unspent funds in the amount of $356,286 will be retained for funding project management services. Council's approval is required in order to proceed with the awarding of the project management services, which will be the subject of a separate report to Council in September. This report will also summarize the total project cost as a whole. July 26, 2.012 Page .3 Proposal No. RFP-1-2012 Architectural & Engineering Design Services • New Operations Centre Selection of Architect Discussion: Council approved the completion of an Environmental Assessment and Feasibility Study for the new Operations Centre in 2009 in the amount of$100,000. Through 2009 and 2010 this process was conducted by AECOM as per Council approval through Report to Council OES 24-10. This was concluded in late 2010 and a preferred site was selected. Through the approval of the 2011 budget, Council approved the acquisition of the site in the amount of$8 million. Subsequently a Report to Council (CAO 15-11) was prepared and approved by Council to acquire the lands at 1955 Clements Road. The City made an offer to purchase in 2011, and subsequently conducted some due diligence investigation of the site before closing the sale in early 2012. After the site was acquired, an Expression of Interest (RFEI-1-2011) process was undertaken to determine a short list of suitable Architectural and Engineering firms to undertake design, site planning and prepare drawings and specifications for the tender and construction of the new Operations Centre. Eight suitable Architectural and Engineering firms were short listed through this process. Request.for,Proposal No. RFP-1-2012 was released, inviting proposals from eight Architectural and Engineering firms. The proposals were evaluated by a committee comprised of staff from Supply & Services, Community Services, including a representative from Independent Project Managers (IPM) for an independent, experienced, objective, and professional opinion. Based on prescribed criteria, the proposals were evaluated and the three highest ranking • respondents were short listed and selected for interviews. At the conclusion of the interviews, a cumulative score of their proposal and a score of their interview was completed. The proponent with the highest ranking score was the firm of Rounthwaite, Dick and Hadley Architects Inc. (RDH) who were selected for contract negotiations in accordance with the RFP Terms of Reference Item 3.7 (a), which resulted in a revised fee proposal of$1,084,125 plus HST. The evaluation committee recommends that the firm of Rounthwaite Dick and Hadley Architects Inc., be authorized to proceed with the design, site planning and tender document preparation of this project in 2012 and 2013 with construction planned to commence in 2013 after budget approval for construction costs, estimated at $20 million. This project will be before Council during the 2013 budget deliberations, and again at the tendering award stage for commencement of construction. Attachments: 1. Resolution 151/10 (OES 24-10) 2. Resolution 157/11 (CAO 15-11) 3. Memorandum from Supply & Services dated June 14, 2012 4. Memorandum from Supply & Services dated April 17, 2012 • Page 4 July 26, 2012 Proposal No. RFP-1-2012 Architectural & Engineering Design Services New Operations Centre Selection of Architect Approved/Endorsed By: 1 r'' 3 rw > V:7664;460 // Everett Bunts*;NP49✓,/CMM Rich rd Hoib•' , P. Eng. Director, Community Services Di ' ion Head, Engineering Services Gillis A. Paterson - rant Smith Director, Corporat Services & Treasurer . Manager, Operations & Fleet Services Vera A. Felgemacher,/ Caryn Kong CGA C.P.P., CPPO, CPPB, C.P.M., CMM III Senior Financial Analyst Manager, Supply & Services Capital & Debt Management Approval a.9tiovic ,ztez.5. /. zci Tony Prevedel, P.Eng. Chief Administrative Officer EB:Ir • July 26, 2012 Page 5 Proposal No. RFP-1-2012 Architectural & Engineering Design Services New Operations Centre Selection of Architect r7r 1 r % City 00. Memo PICKERING To: Tony Prevedel July 25, 2012 Chief Administrative Officer. From: Gil Paterson • Director Corporate Services & Treasurer • Copy: Director, Community Services Manager, Supply & Services Subject: Request for Proposal —Architectural & Engineering Design Services, New Operations Centre, No. RFP-1-2012 - File: F-300-001 Hadley The proponent with the highest ranking score (84.6) is the firm of R unthda it accordance k RFP Terms of Architects Inc. (RDH) and was selected for contract negotiations in Reference Item 3.7. Their price was $1,239,000 (plus HST). Negotiations resulted in a revised fee proposal of$1,084,125 (plus HST). The Director, Community Services advised you accordingly and has confirmed there is value in the $60,000 difference to the second highest ranking score (84.1) of KNY Architects. A copy of July 3, 2012 correspondence from RDH is attached for your information. If you require further information, feel free to contact me. GP/vaf Attachment City Community Services � 4 _ RECEIVED JUN 4 2u12 . , emo�.` + ir41i:< . 2 x FILE NO. 'KERN BEY.TO I 1 O FWD ❑COPY ❑CIRCULATE_ MAYOR COUNCIL CAO CLERK REC CORP SERVICES ENG SERVICES HUMAN RESOURCES June 14, 2012 To: Everett Buntsma OPS CENTRE LEGAL _ Director, Community Services FIRE FAC OPERATIONS PLAOFFICE N&SUSTAIN DEV From: Vera A. Felgemacher Manager, Supply & Services Copy: Subject: Request for Proposal No. RFP-1-2012 Architectural & Engineering Design Services New Operations Centre Submission Date: Thursday, April 12, 2012, 12:00 Noon (local time) - File: F-5300-001 Further to memo dated April 17, 2012, eight (8) proposals proceeded to Stage II of the evaluation process. Each member of the Evaluation Committee has completed evaluating the eight (8) proposals, completing Stage II of the evaluation process. An Evaluation Committee meeting was held Wednesday, May 16th at 2:00 p.m., to evaluate the eight (8) proposals resulting in a combined average score for each proposal. In Stage III of the evaluation process, a scoring of the pricing was performed and combined for an overall score of each proposal. During Stage IV- Cumulative.Score - all scores were combined and in accordance with Part 3 — Evaluation of Proposals, Item 3.2.4, at the conclusion of Stage III, all scores from Stage II and Stage III were combined and the three (3) highest ranking proponents selected for an interview in Stage V. The three (3) highest ranking proponents were as follows: • Rounthwaite Dick and Hadley Architects Inc. (RDH) • Karp Namisniak Yamamoto Architects Inc. (KNY) • IBI Group (Canada) Inc References provided by the three (3) highest ranking proponents were asked to complete a Reference Evaluation Questionnaire. Results of the Questionnaire were summarized and distributed to the Evaluation Committee and were given the opportunity to review and revise their scoring for Quality of References in Stage II. One committee member revised scoring on their form accordingly. Interviews were arranged with the three (3) highest ranking proponents. The questions and corresponding evaluation points were provided to the proponents prior to the interview. Interviews with the three (3) highest ranking proponents were held on Tuesday, June 12, 2012 and the Evaluation Committee has completed the Stage V review consisting of evaluation of interview meetings (Reference: Stage V- Evaluation of Interview). A copy of the Stage V— Interview— Committee Member evaluation form is attached. 1 tit a . C.tt f e P1CK1RING To: -Richard Holborn April 17, 2012 Division Head, Engineering Services Committee Members From: ° Vera A. Felgemacher _ • Manager, Supply & Services . .. .. - Copy: . Subject: Request for Proposal No. RFP-1-2012 Architectural & Engineering Design Service- New Operations Centre Submission Date: Thursday, April 12, 2012, 2:00 pm (local time) • - File: F-5300-001 — _ Request for Proposals were invited from eight (8) prequalified companies and eight (8) companies responded by the official submission date and time. Two (2) addenda were issued. Evaluation of proposals is performed in five (5) stages. Reference: Part 3, Evaluation of Proposals, Item 3.2 Stages of Proposal Evaluation: 3.2.1 Stage I – Review for Compliance y Stage I will consist of a review to determine which mandatory proposals requirements as of thetSubmissiotnrDate requirements. Proposals failing to satisfy the ma Y 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 - Scoring 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 – Evaluation of Pricing Stage Ill will consist of a scoring of the pricing submitted. The evaluation of price will be undertaken after Stage I and II have been completed. 3.2.4 Stage IV - Cumulative Score At the conclusion of Stage Ill, all scores from Stage II and Stage Ill will be combined and the three (3) highest ranking proponents will be selected for an interview in Stage V. 1B2P, 3.2.5 Stage V — Evaluation of Interview Stag e V will consist of a scoring of the interview which will be added se o h Stage IV scoring.at ons g the conclusion of Stage V, the highest rankin g prop onent will be in 'accordance with Pad 4 —Terms and Conditions of the RFP process. 3.2.6 Tie Score In the event of a tie score in Stage V, the selected proponent will be determined in accordance with the City's Purchasing Procedures. All six (6) proposals will proceed to Stage II. Attachments are as follows: 1. Evaluation Form — Stage I 2. - Evaluation Form — Stage II (to be used by Evaluation Committee Members). 3. Evaluation•Form — Stage II Rating Criteria 4. Copies of the proposals.received • Please ee. Each co-ordinate an appropriate date and time for a meeting of the evaluation o mitt the meet ng member should review the submissions carefully according to the rating criteria time. Please do not disclose any information to enquiring proponents &during this time -they will be advised of the outcome in due course. Please direct inquiries to Supply en If you require further information, please feel free to contact me or a member of Supply & Services. • VAF/bk Attachments • April 17, 2012 . . • Page 2 Request for Proposal No. RFP-1-2012 Architectural & Engineering Design Service — New Operations Centre Request for Proposal 1 P x Architectural & Engineering Design Services New Operations Centre • RFP-1-2012 Stage 1 —Evaluation Form Stage I will consist of a review to determine which proposals comply with all of as.of mandatory requirements. Proposals failing to satisfy themandatory the Submission Date will be provided an opportunity mi Rectification will Proposals failing to satisfy the mandatory requirements as of the Rect be excluded from further consideration. However, all proposals satisfy the mandatory requirements: Proposals are to include the following mandatory requirements: • A. Submission Form (Appendix C). - B. Rate Bid Form (Appendix D) • C. Reference Form (Appendix E) • D. Acknowledge Addendum #1 and Addendum #2 • • E. Table of Contents (Appendix F) Item C F. Profile (Appendix F) Item C Com•an Item A Item B Item C Item D Item E Item F Aecom Canada ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ Architects Ltd. Barry Bryan ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ 1 Associates Ltd. IBI Group (Canada) ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ Inc. Karp Namisniak ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ Yamamoto ✓ Architects Inc. . Morrison Hershfield ✓ ✓ Ltd. • Reinders & Rieder ✓ ✓ ✓ Ltd. Roundwaite Dick & ✓ ✓ ,/ ✓ Hadley Architects ✓ ✓ Inc. URS Architects & ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ Engineers Canada ✓ ✓ Inc. • RFP-1-20 i_ Architectural & Engineering Design Services 1 w 4 New Operations Centre Evaluation Form—Stage II Rating Criteria Stage II will consist of a scoring by the City of each q ualified proposal on the basis of the rated criteria.p P Pro onents should refer to Appendix E—RFP Particulars— Section D. Rated Criteria for a breakdown of the Rated p Criteria. D. RATED CRITERIA The following is an overview of the categories and weighting for the rated criteria of the RFP. Rated Criteria Category _ Weighting (Points) Experience on Similar Projects 20 Understanding of Project - 15 _ Work Plan and Deliverables 15 • Project Team Overview _ 15 . - Quality of References — 5 Qualit of Pro•osal .- • . 85 Total Points Experience on Similar Projects= 20 Points ears that are comparable in Provide three (3) relevant examples of past aprOOeect synopsis s thattident identifies the team members scope and magnitude. This should include p 1 Y ps assembled who worked on the project, the current project status, budgeted costs versus actual costs; scheduling issues and resolutions, and design challenges, efficiencies. Provide client names, contacts. and up-to-date contact phone numbers. Please advise the references that the City may be contacting them. Understanding of Project = 15 Points _ The Proposal shall include information that provides: . a. Information that the Proponent understands the objectives Proponent and/or their s project; Proponents must o relate these objectives to past experience or expertise the b. Identification of"value-added" services brought by the Proponent's team; and c. A summary of the risks, problems or issues associated with the Work and how they will be mitigated. Work Plan and Deliverables = 15 Points ' The Proponent is to articulate, clearly and concisely, the following: . a. An indication of how soon the Proponent can commence the work; b. A detailed work plan indicating the method, tasks, deliverables; c. A schedule that identifies Work phases (by Gantt Chart or other similar illustration) including uckey dam n for major deliverables (design development,working drawings, tender documents, and post construction) in the Proponent's detailed work plan; d. Proposed staffing roles and the amount of time, shown in hours, they will be dedicated to this project; e. Identification of the experience/past projects of the cost consultant and their success rate; and f. State the assumptions regarding the roles and involvement of the City staff. Proiect Team Overview = 15 Points It is important that the Work be provided by a staff team that can demonstrate e e and knowledge scope.of,In particular, experience in providing similar services for projects of comparable nature, p 1 ;�, the Proponent should provide an cverview of the key personnel who would be primarily involved in the project and include the following: a. Identify the prime firm submitting the Proposal and the sub-consultant or sub-contractor firms that will be assembled to undertake the work. b. The name, title, mailing address, phone number, fax number and e-mail of the Design Project Leader; c. Condensed resumes and professional credentials of each individual on the Project Team that highlights their education, training, and work history; d. Th e respective roles of the team members and their current office locations. eand mth Project named in • this RFP cannot be replaced without written approval from the City of Manager; e. Current and future project list that will be undertaken by members a e assigned tent' h member their current workload (i.e., identify other competing priorities that this project timeline); and f. Organizational chart that clearly.defines the chain of command for each individual with the team. Qualit of References- Total Points = 15 Points • • ar in scop a and value completed over the last five (5) years. Complete Appendix E — Relevance of projects simil p • Reference Form Qualit of Pr.o osal — Total Points = 5 Presentation of proposal, examples, details, content organization and how well instructions are followed. • • • • • Dso0 h70 E me = � D •-« � � N v D � , ° _ s ate• • 00 ,„ - o � 3 •a = G) � •2 go 1 86•o 0 °- °- Cl. CD - o FP. 3 Z n c a 0 3 00 ` am �, = a N �_ �, � 0 o 77 p o ea—,• Q Q ro x Cn C pr' CDD Q. Qo CD 3 -I 0 0 O X N 0 CAD -v - orn3m X Z -, cD 6 CO 3 C o CD p Q ..a. CD N • h w �. ; • 0 Q 5 CD up 0 C CD C A O CCDD Dj 2 al v °' -D m = ■ CD m cfl cn c 3. it Cr). L) 3 7� ca CD CD O "n CD 0 (A Z Cv (D• O o Fa (� 7 CD w = CD. p y Q N I 0) Z FD 'ID 0 0 v 0 F' o' - - N w c CD 7 CD C) O 3 CD N M W K > o I m c oo -< I I < , p a == co o 0 n . a) w Q i 3 N N O 3 - 0 a) W o _ <D o ..c �' u, m- v � 3Dm - 0 = m m m' m D a o Q° cn X r« CD I N a I N ' o _ - 317-1 w . a < 73 0 m t CD rl. m r+ cp cm o :3:1: -o N 'G o C 3 3 � � p m, , m_ v . > N , m ao cp. m > N W:.. mci C) o � D. m o m.« co cn 0- . o D � < m 03 _a.(fa 0 C 0 XI m x (0 3 o co c -a 3 v 0.0 co -6' 0. 13 ✓ " C•) O CL o. v v B a =ru r,. 0) v a o CD M 03 c cD m n r xi o c m 3 - c m m care -n 'o m :-% O co 70 N '0 < C O' I) _ N O z -0 m O < r Z O C r3+ 'Q cD :D O • N. 0 •-+r 0 0 N cgo o c m o a -a a a,• . C. C ,.r 1V 0 O c lei . 18Q • vnaIDo v m � � °- C C CD U., 0 o o y v -o O. n N fD _q 0- 3 S � oo 3 N • (D N Q (D N v C N N m c 0 Z �, 3 o w 3 m . O C � (1:1v 0 t y • cD •O 3 rn (!).,` -::0 0 -, :CD N (D .: • (O Request for Proposal - RFP -1-2012 New Operations Centre Total Evaluation Scores Summary Stage V Average Average . Total Score ; Score Average Ranking • Stage IV Stage V Score /100 /20 ` /120 Respondent Rounthwaite Dick and Hadley Architects • Karp Namisniak Yamamoto Architects . IBI Group Evaluation Committee (signatures) Date • ATTACHMENT#_ TO REPORT#c S1 a 6 "/ • Cali al Office of the CAO Received JUL 2 O 2 } I � File igi Follow Up Mayor Corn Sery Council C&R Directors Eng Services To: Tony Prevedel sMT oiler & Faduly 19, 2012 Chief Administrative Officer Clerk Corp Services Fire Office Sustain From: Everett Buntsma Human Res Plan & Dev Director, Community Services Legal & LS Copy: Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer • Division Head, Engineering Services • Manager, Supply & Services Supervisor, Engineering & Capital Works Subject: Tender No. T-2-2012 Liverpool Road, Road Reconstruction and Storm Sewer Work Annland Street to Ilona Park Road - File: A-1440 Recommendation: 1. That Tender No.T-2-2012 submitted by Wyndale Paving Company Limited at a cost of. $547,630.43 (FIST included) be accepted; 2. That the total gross project cost of$626,731 (HST included) and a net project cost of $564,391 (net of HST rebate) including the tender amount and other associated costs be approved; 3. That the Director, Corporate Services &Treasurer finance the project as follows: . a) the sum of$560,000 be financed by the issue of an internal loan over a period not to exceed ten years; b) the balance of$4,391 from property taxes; and 4. That the appropriate City of Pickering officials be authorized to take necessary action to give effect thereto. Executive Summary: As part of the 2011 Roads Capital Budget, Liverpool Road, Road Reconstruction and Storm Sewer Work—Anniand Street to Ilona Park Road was approved as a project. Tender No. T-2-2012 was issued on Friday, June 29, 2012 and closed on Tuesday, July 17, 2012. The low bid submitted by Wyndale Paving Company Limited in tr id amount estimated$5 at,630.43 731(HST included) is recommended for approval. The total gross projec t cost (HST included) with an estimated total net project cost of$564,391 (net of HST rebate). 1 7 In accordance with Purchasing Policy Item 07.01, the Chief Administrative Officer is authorized to act on behalf of Council during Council recess in approving an award of a project, and the Treasurer is authorized to approve financing for same. Financial Implications: 1. Tender Amount $484,628.70 Tender T-2-2012 63,001.73 HST (13%) 547,630.43 Sub-Total (54,472.27) HST Rebate (11.24%) • $493,158.16 Total 2. Approved Source of Funds Roads Capital Budget Location Project Source of Funds Budget Required Code Liverpool Road 5320.1120 Debt 10 Year $950,000.00 I$t 60,0 0.000 Reconstruction & Storm Property Taxes 0 4,391.00 Sewer Work—Annland Street to Ilona Park Road Total $950,000.00 . $564,391.00 3. Estimated Project Costing Summary Tender T-2-2012 Liverpool Road, Road Reconstruction and $484,629.00 Storm Sewer Work —Annland Street to Ilona Park Road 10,000.00 Materials Testing 0,000.00 Miscellaneous Costs 1 10,000.00 Contingency 554,629.00 Sub Total — Costs 72,102.00 HST (13%) 626,731.00 Total Gross Project Costs (62,340.00) HST Rebate (11.24%) $564,391.00 Total Net Project Costs Net Project Costs (over) under Approved Funds I $385,609.00 July 19, 2012 Page 2 Tender No. T-2-2012 Liverpool Road Reconstruction and Storm Sewer Work Annland Street to Ilona Park Road 19, E It is necessary to report to Council on projects requiring debt financing in order to formalize the borrowing. This project was tendered in late July, 2012, and did not make it to the last Council meeting before the summer recess. In order to formalize this debt before the Council recess, Recommendation 2 b) of Report to Council CST 21-12 dated July 9, 2012, approved for a debenture issue in the sum of $950,000 based on the budget amount approved in the 2011 Capital Budget for this project. Since the actual funding required of$560,000 is lower than the original budget, an internal loan not to exceed 10 years will be issued in lieu of debentures as provided for under Recommendation 2g) of Report CST 21-12. Discussions: As part of the 2011 Roads Capital teet to Budget,onal ParkoRoad was approved as a Reconstruction and Storm Sewer Work—Annland project. Tender T-2-2012 was issued'ted from com June anies o01wh ch f ve responded by the official 2012. Requests for tenders were inv p closing date and time. The low bid submitted by Wyndale Paving Company Limited is recommended for approval. Wyndale Paving Company Limited is currently working for the City on Tender No.T-10-2012 for the East Shore Community Centre Parking Lot Improvements and is deemed acceptable by the Supervisor, Engineering & Capital Works. The Health & Safety Policy, a current WSIB Workplace Injury Summary Report and Certificate of Clearance issued by Workplace Safety & Insurance Board, confined space entry procedure and a list of employees trained in Confined Space Training, as submitted by Wyndale Paving Company Limited, have been reviewed by the Coordinator, Health & Safety and deemed acceptable. The Certificate of Insurance has been reviewed by the Manager, Finance & Taxation and is deemed acceptable. In conjunction with staffs review of the consultant's previous work experience, check of references submitted and the bonding available on this project, the tender is deemed acceptable. Upon careful examination of the tender and relevant documents received, the Community Services Department, Engineering Services Division recommends acceptance of the low bid submitted by Wyndale Paving Company Limited for Tender No. T-2-2012 in the amount of $547,630.43 (HST included) and that the total net project cost of$564,391 be approved: Attachments: 1. Supply & Services Memorandum dated July 19, 2012 Page 3 July 19, 2012 Tender No.T-2-2012 Liverpool Road Reconstruction and Storm Sewer Work Annland Street to Ilona Park Road Prepared By: Approved/Endorsed By: ( , i _ , �,• 194 4�i�� �V' n,}' N ' elsk CET, CMM II Everett`Euntsma, NPD, CMM . Darrell y, �' Supervisor, Engineering & Capital Works Director, Community Services I r , , 1.. 'I I::{ . .; :_ .. ,: -r'f .9 Lam- t'. -^4..P"'∎ ,',, Vera A. Felgemacher f1.,Gillis Paterson, CMA CSCMP, CPPO, CPPB, C.P.M., CMMIII 6' Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer Manager, Supply & Services Caryn Kong, CGA - Senior Financial Analyst . Capital & Debt Management (11'6LIA`j. - `Z/ b1/8Zt: ' . Ad-■• Richard Holborn, P. Eng. Division Head, Engineering Services . DS:ds • Approval opliall (1 6. ,--)6i ,-1,01 , Tony Prevedel, P.Eng.' 4 Chief Administrative Officer July 19, 2012 Page 4 Tender No. T-2-2012 • Liverpool Road Reconstruction and Storm Sewer Work Annland Street to Ilona Park Road • re`s 'I 9 PICKERING Memo . . . To: • Richard Holborn July 19, 2012 Division Head, Engineering Services • revised • From: Vera•A. Felgemacher - Manager, Supply & Services. . • Copy: Supervisor, Engineering & Capital Works Subject: Tender No. T-2-2012 • Tender for Liverpool Road Reconstruction and Storm Sewer Work Annland Street To Ilona Park Road - File: F-5400-001 . • 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 for the above mentioned tender. Five (5) bidders responded'and submitted a tender for this.project. • 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 13.03 (r) provides checking tendered unit . prices and extensions unit prices shall govern and extensions will be corrected accordingly, which has been done. • All deposits other than the low three bidders may be returned to the applicable bidders as provided for by Purchasing Procedure No. PUR 010-001, Item 13.03(w). Three (3) bids have been retained for review at this time. . Copies of the tenders are attached for your review along with the summary of costs. • SUMMARY • •HST Included Total Tendered •Bidder After Calculation Check • Amount • Wyndale Paving Co. Ltd. $547,630.43 • $547,630.43 . Mar= King Construction Company Ltd. $584,392.55 $584,392.55 Concord Paving Inc. $628,307.12 $628,307.12 Coco Paving.Inc. $747,895.59 $746,087.59 Hard = Co Construction Ltd. $838,663.40 $838,663.40 �EC 1V D Legal and Legislative Services CITY OTC PICKERING Clerk's Office JUL 1 1 2012 Directive Memorandum SUPPLY AND SERVICES July 11, 2012 To: Gil Paterson Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer From: Debbie Shields City Clerk Subject: Direction as per Minutes of the Special Meeting of City Council held on July 9,2012 • Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer, Report CST 21-12 Approval of Debt Financing and Internal Loans for Council Approved Capital Projects to be Undertaken During the Summer Recess of Council. Council Decision Resolution #100/12 1 . That Report CST 21-12 of the Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer regarding: - a) approval of debt financing for the West ShoreBoulevard Road Icon and Storm Oklahoma Drive to Sunrise Avenue, Liverpool Road Reconstru Sewer Work - Annland Street to Ilona Park Drive, and Architectural Services for the new Operations Centre projects to be undertaken during the summer recess of Council; and Pipe b) approval of internal loans for the Ultraviolet Disinfection System S stem Repairs-Dunbarton Pool, and Library-Radio Frequency Identification Y (RFID) projects to be undertaken and awarded during the summer recess of Council be received. 2. That Council authorize the Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer to finance the projects as follows: a) the sum of$330,000 for the West ShoreBoulevard Road Improvements - Oklahoma Drive to Sunrise Avenue as provided for in the 2011 Capital Budget be financed by the issue of debentures by the Regional Municipality of Durham over a period not to exceed ten years at a rate to be determined; 197 - Subject: Directive Memorandum July 11, 2012 Page 2 b) the sum of$950,000 for the Liverpool Road Reconstruction and Storm Sewer' Work -Annland Street to Ilona Park Drive to be financed by the issue of debentures by the Regional Municipality of Durham over a period not to exceea - ten years at a rate to be determined as provided for in the 2011 Capital.,Budget; c) the sum of $1,475,000 for the Architectural Services for the new Operations Centre as provided for in the 2.012 Capital Budget be financed by the issuance of debentures by the Regional Municipality of Durham or an internal loan for a period not to exceed 20 years or from the proceeds of the sale of City owned land; d) the sum of up to $125,000 for the Ultraviolet Disinfection System and Pipe Repairs-Dumbarton Indoor Pool as provided for.in the 2012 Capital Budget be financed by an internal loan for period of up to 5 years or from other funds as are available at the discretion of the Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer; e) the sum of up to $250,000 for the Library-RFID as provided for in the 2012 Capital Budget be financed by an internal loan for a period of up to 5 years or from other funds as are available at the discretion of the Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer; f) the annual repayment charges in the amount of approximately$350,000 be included in the annual Current Budget for the City of Pickering commencing in 2013, continuing thereafter until the loans are repaid, and any financing costs be paid out of the Current Budget; and g) the Director, Corporate Services &Treasurer be authorized to take any actions necessary at his discretion in order to give effect to the foregoing including the issuance of internal loans in lieu of debt for any or all of the above projects; 3. That the Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer be authorized d to provide Budgets a y additional funding required from sources available through in the Financial Control Policy; 4. That the draft by-laws attached to this report be enacted; and 5. That the appropriate City of Pickering Officials be authorized to take necessary action to give effect hereto. Please take any action deemed necessary. 5 Debbie Shields /Ir • w 0 co a cn 1- Z o °c V • o its R Q. a ta . c O U • 'O Q. c• crs • L. = �. ',) � C N o v . R Q E m` M 4� ''�' c°) < E c 1- U Qa N ' • ....0 1c F= 1- to r ° 0 Y o W D E U o . o E O r c)Z C. • I Q ° N m re W o\ •0 O o ^) < O c • av) a CO c) >- U. W w C F- z N F =' V � \N) 4) 4� U W O ... '0 Q �+ �� Y� ,mil • LL z (tS as O'., �\ p �'� 2 O o 0 \o, • 0 'c o ,L cc vi 6= C p 't7 U !, -p co E! 0 1ti aci n �' 1-ti., `i 1 \ ° " O u cn 0 c c -° c `; c • a) � � `m o o ' Z m t• O ) 6- . • A ..• -1) lc mU U C' 11 `� ti tY CD Cti Y a U T o `o O \\.) .N v c) (-NI '65. 2 o U U • • ATTACHMENT# TO REPORT#rsT..4-� 199 RECEIVED d { CITY OF PICKERING ° Office of the i , AUG 0 1 2012 ,; w 4 , ; jut 3 1 27_1/A e in_.� i i .,,T„f,; Received rii cori lecd.PLYAND SERVdGES File Follow Up _AAevar Corn Se v Council C&R To: Tony Prevedel ^ July 27, 2012 Directors Eng Services Chief Administrative Officer sMr Oper& Fac Clerk Corp Services From: Everett Buntsma Fire Office Sustain Director, Community Services Human Res Plan & Dev Copy: Manager, Operations & Fleet Services Legal & LS Supervisor, Parks Operations ° . • Subject: Tender No. T-7-2012 Tender for Supply and Installation of Sports Field Lighting - Dunmoore Park Softball Field #1 . • - File: A-1440 • . Diamond#1 Overview: As part of the 2012 Parks Capital rehabilitation projects.Dunmoore The replacement of repairs and associated works are being prop osed as Dunmoore Diamond #1 lighting was identified and approved th by is project.in Their 201 snit aKirkland Engineering was retained to provide consulting services for indicated the twenty-two year old light poles should be replaced Capital Budget. t. Additional funds were requested and approved as part of the 2012 Parks p recommended as being the best value to the City is being endorsed by the Community Services Department. In accordance with Purchasing Policy Item 07.01, the Chief Administrative Officer and therized to • act on behalf of Council during Council recess in approving an award of a project, Treasurer is authorized to approve financing of same. • Recommendation: 1. That low bid Option C as submitted by Wayne Electric Company Ltd. at a tender amount of $174,133.00 (HST included)be accepted; 2. That the total gross project cost of$199,445.00 (HST included) and a et proje cicost of $179,606.40 (net of HST rebate) including the tendered amount and other be approved; 3. That the Director, Corporate Services &Treasurer be authorized to finance the project as follows: a) the sum of$30,000 as provided in the 2012 Capital Budget— Parks be funded from Federal Gas Tax Grant; 2 0 b) the sum of$94,606.40 as provided in the 2011 & 2012 Capital Budget—Parks be funded from the Invest in Ontario grant; c) the sum of$20,000 as provided in the 2011 Capital Budget— Parks be funded from the Parkland.Reserve Fund, and; d) the donations totalling $35,000 from the Pickering Men's Slow Pitch League and Pickering Recreation Fast ball Association be applied; and . 4. That the appropriate City of Pickering officials be authorized to take necessary action to give ' effect thereto. Financial Implications: • 1. Request for Proposal Amount • 00.00 , 1541 Request for Tender No. T-7-2012 $154,100.00 HST (13%) � 174,133.00 Sub-Total HST Rebate (11.24%) (17,320:84)$156,812.16 Total • 2. Approved Source of Funds Parks Capital Budget— Dunmoore Park Project Code Source of Funds Budget Required 5780.1205.6181 Federal Gas Tax • $ 30,000.00 $ 30,000.00 5780.1205.6181 Donations 20,000.00 20,000.00 5780.1205.6181/5780.1112.6181 Invest in Ontario.Grant $123,000.00 94,606.40 5780.1112.6181 Parkland Reserve Fund 20,000.00 20,000.00 Sub Total $193,000.00 $164,606.40 Additional Donations 0 15,000.00 • Total $193,000.00 $179,606.40 July 27, 2012 Page 2 Tender No. T-7-2012 • Tender for Supply and Installation of Sports Field Lighting, Dunmoore Park Softball Field#1 2J = • 3. Estimated Project Costing Summary $154,100.00 Tender No. T-7-2012 00.00 Consultant Fees 4,1,1100.00 Miscellaneous & Tender Costs 15,000.00 Contingency Sub Total 22,945.00 HST (13%) 199,445.00 Total.Project Cost 19 838.60 HST Rebate (11.24%) . ,17• . 4 Total Net Project Cost Net Project Costs under over Approved Funds $28,393.60 The j roect approved in the 2012 Capital Budget for Dunmoore Park l benches e nrepairs to the p _ Diamond # 1 and associated works such as.replacement of fencing and replacement of lighting. The replacement of the park lighting has e t n deemed d op priority,and undertake will be completed first. The balance of unspent funds fort is prof the repairs to Diamond #1 and associated works noted above to the extent funding is available. $60,000 for the Discussion: As part of the 2011 Capital Budget, Council approved to safety f concerns over replacement si replacement of light fixtures at Dunmoor Park Baseball to provide consulting services and formulate low light levels. Kirkland Engineering wa specifications for the project. Their initial review indicated the twenty-two year old light poles should also be replaced as part of this project. requested and approved in the 2012 Capital Budget, including donations League Additional funds were reque p 20 000. Following approval of the 2012 Capital Budgecreat on Fastball Association Pitch also $ system have committed to donating $30,000. The Pickering R committed to a donation of $5,000, resulting in total donations of$35,000 for the lighting sy replacement. , Supply . Services advertised the project in the Daily Commercial News, as well son the ve City's website. A mandatory site visit was held June er for this project. Three different options for bidders, of which 4 have submitted a ten replacement lighting were offered, and the option that will provide tch Community cost savings in e p -energy use and reduced maintenance is being recommended ineering's review and Department. This recommendation is congruent with Kirkland Eng recommendation. t in an estimated 35% reduction i of The installation of Mus co Light ht Structure system will result use. It is also covered by a 25 year warranty program which will reduce d costs. . Page 3 July 27, 2012 . Tender No. T-7-2012 . Tender for.Supply and Installation of Sports Field Lighting, Dunmoore Park Softball Field #1 The Health & Safety Policy, a current WSIB Workplace Injury Summary Report, and Certificate of Clearance issued by the Workplace Safety & Insurance Board, have been reviewed by the 9 ,- .- Coordinator, Health & Safety, and deemed acceptable. The certificate of Insurance has been °- reviewed by the Manager, Finance &Taxation, and is deemed acceptable. In conjunction with staff's review of the bidder's previous work experience, check of references submitted, and the bonding available on this project, the tender is deemed acceptable. Upon careful examination of the tender and relevant documents received, the Community Services Department recommends acceptance of the low bid submitted by Wayne Electric Company Limited for Tender No. T-7-2012, in the amount of$174,133.00 (HST included), and that the total net project cost of$179,606.40 be approved. Attachments: 1. Supply & Services Memo dated June 25, 2012 2. Recommendations from Kirkland Engineering • Prepared By: • Approved/Endorsed B ;: r� .• 7 Grant Smith Everett Buntsma, PD, CMM Manaier, Operations & Fleet Services Director, Community Services Vera A. - •emacher Gillis Paterson, CMA CSCMP, CPPO, CPPB, C.P.M., CMMIII Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer Manager, Supply & Services I Kristine Senior Manager, Accounting Services GS:Ir July 27. 2012 Page 4 Tender No. T-7-2012 Tender for Supply and Installation of Sports Field Lighting, Dunmoore Park Softball Field #1 Approval 203 ;, .7 ICY jt1zoi2 . Tony Prevedel, P. Eng. Chief Administrative Officer • • • Page 5 July 27, 2012 Tender No. T-7-2012 • Tender for Supply and Installation of Sports Field Lighting, Dunmoore Park Softball Field #1 Citg O. • gv, i �� 1-:1! PICKERING • Memo • ______________—_ To: Everett Buntsma . June 25, 2012 Director, Community Services . From: Vera A. Felgemacher - Manager, Supply.& Services . .Copy: Manager, Operations & Fleet Services . - Subject: Tender No. T-7-2012 - • • . . • Tender for the Supply and Installation of Sports Field Lighting - . - Dunmoore Park, Softball Field No. 1 • File: F-5400-001 - 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 for the above mentioned tender. One.(1) addendum was issued on this project. A mandatory site visit was held on Thursday, June 7, 2012 and eight (8) bidders attended of which four (4) bidders responded and submitted a tender for this project. • . 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 13.03 (r) provides.checking tendered unit prices and extensions unit prices,shall govern and extensions will be corrected accordingly, which has been done. All deposits•other than the low three bidders may be returned to.the applicable bidders as • provided for by Purchasing Procedure No. PUR 010-001, Item 13.03(w). Three (3) bids have been retained for review at this time. Copies of the tenders are attached for your review along with the summary of costs. ,. SUMMARY - HST Included • Option C — Musco Option A - Hubbell Option B - Musco "Light Structure System" •• Bidder Total After . Total After • Total . After Tendered Calculation .Tendered Calculation Tendered Calculation • • _ Amount Check Amount • 'Check • • Amount • Check _ Loc-Pave $162,381.00 $162,381.00 No Bid , No Bid . Construction Ltd. Wayne Electric • $167,805.00 $167,805.00 $161,703.00 $161,703.00 $174,133.00 $174,133.00 • Co. Ltd. . , Black & McDonald $236,762.53 $236,762.53 $230,949.05 $230,949.05 $243,379.05 $243,379.05 . Ltd. • Automatic rejection '— Bid qualified by clarifications added to tendering Electric Sentry document. Reference: Purchasing Policy No. PUR 010., Procedure 23.02, Ltd. •• Item 6; Information to Bidders — Item 21, 24, 26, 27. • 20.�Pursuant to Information to Bidders Item 28, the following will be requested of the low 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 & 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 Certificate of Clearance issued by Workplace.Safety & Insurance Board; (d) the City's certificate of insurance shall be completed by the bidder's agent, • broker,or insurer; (e) Valid certificate(s) of qualification (electrician - construction and maintenance) . issued by the Ontario Training Adjustment Board for personnel performing electrical service for the City; (f) Copies of current qualification certificates for each such personnel; (g) a copy of the current lock out procedure to be used; • (h) a copy of Fall Arrest Policy; (i) a copy of"genie and man lift licence" for each employee using such equipment.; • (j). list of Sub-Contractors in accordance with General Conditions Item 32; (k) Waste Management Plan to be used on this project in accordance with Tendering Specifications Rem 18. Please include the following items in your Report to Council: (a) if items (a) through (i) noted above, are acceptable to the Co-ordinator, Health & .• Safety; . (b) if item (d) Insurance— is acceptable to the Manager, Finance &Taxation; (c) if item (j) and (k) noted above are acceptable to you; (d) any past work experience with the low bidder for Option A (Loc-Pave Construction Ltd.) or the low bidder for Option B and Option C (Wayne Electric Co-. Ltd.) including • work location; (e) without past work experience, if reference information is acceptable; (f)* the appropriate account number(s) to which this work is to be charged; . (g) the budget amount(s) assigned thereto; - (h) • Treasurer's confirmation of funding; (i) related departmental approvals; and (j) related comments specific to the project. • Kirkland Engineering Ltd. 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. Duplicate copies of the bids are attached for the consultant's use. • June 25, 2012 Page 2 Tender No. T-7-2012 Tender for the Supply and Installation of Sports • Field Liahtina - Dunmoore Park, Softball Field No. 1 Please do not disclo se 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 r 2 0 6 a vised of the outcome in due course. .1f Lou require further information, please feel free to contact me or a member of Supply & S . vices. . • VAF/jg Attach ents • • • • • • • June 25, 2012. Page 3 Tender No. T-7-2012 Tender for the Supply and Installation of Sports _ _ •- • •.. - • . ..00re Park, Softball Field No. 1 . i In • � � w . m 0 U • 1Q 4 '4 e- c i0 d c pi\ 1 `R C o Z •a�cF M 4,4 o Ts .tH b9 ii to try I e O VI '� 4- a Ki 0 u, CO m c :►• ,� CO p ro ► dE O X n - a o 0 1-a M �i • 0 V Q En ta , En N C E a H 0 % G E A �% • d c - o w t . p~cE r) ' v �a M 0 = cu a •U J U c) N co fA fA . O •p r H Q Ti; N C21 ti) e- E 13 \ . . m • LU c cn -1 a - € • c� pea V a � K U . H O� N ma O 0 O\ a o . u- UO 'O 0 m . !� • C 0 to E co c CY 9 ? Q- c 3 Lii III .0 Z � \ co cc en -0 a o . �_ G) N < J 3 • y o i ∎ L N v W. d ~ C A 7 Cl) d a) C _ d Z +.''Cad, } } . .} . . Q a_.co a �- �, 1 �— 6 C C C 0 LIIIIIII lilt Ci) c. - • 2 n 8 K I R K LA N D ENGINEERING LTD. p.705-745-2831 www.kirklandeng.com 570 Water St. f. 705-741-1526 ' Peterborough,ON K9H 3M8 July 13,2012 Project No.: 4487 City of Pickering One The Esplanade • Pickering, ON. • LI V.6K7 Attention: Grant Smith Subject: Recommendation for Tender No.T-7-2012 • We have reviewed the qualified submissions for the Tender No. T-7-2012,— Tender for the Supply and Installation of Sports Field Lighting — Dunmoore Park, Softball Field No. 1, and • have some observations for you. Based on the information I have received, all of the systems reviewed do meet the lighting requirements. The total light fixture wattage for the Hubbell system, submitted under Option A, is 42kW. The total light fixture wattage for the Musco system, submitted under Option B and Option C, is 27kW. This is a difference of about 35%,or 15kW. The lowest price quoted for Option A is $162,381.00 (Hubbell fixtures quoted). The lowest price quoted for Option B is $161,703.00(Musco fixtures quoted). The lowest price quoted for Option C is $174,133.00 (Musco fixtures and warranty/maintenance package quoted). The difference between the highest of these prices and lowest is approximately$12,500.00. Given the energy savings noted above (approximately 35%) and the value added with the warranty/maintenance package for only an extra 8%a 12,50 notation for Option Cimomly $500 per year over the 25 years), we would recommend q Electric Co. Ltd,be awarded the contract for this work. Kirkland Engineering Ltd. Atati Irv '` Holly Kent,Designer RECEIVED ATTACHMEN # ..TO REPORT# 63-) 2 flr CITY OF PICKERING Lib/ o n JUL 3 01012 - rii,-LYAND SERVICES Office of the CA e Received JUL 1 5 201 File Follow Up Mayor Com Sery To: Tony Prevedel council C&R J.ily 25, 2012 Chief Administrative Officer Directors Eng Services SMT Oper & Fac From: Everett Buntsma clerk Corp Services Director, Community Services Fire Office Sustain Copy: Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer Human Res Plan &'Dev Division Head, Engineering Services Leya� & �s Manager, Supply & Services • Supervisor, Engineering & Capital Works • Subject: 1-14-2012 - Rosebank South Park Landscape Construction - File: A-1440 Recommendations: 1. That Tender No. T-14-2012 submitted by Colpac Construction Inc., in the total tendered amount of$139,635.23 (HST included) and a net cost of$125,745.85 be accepted; 2. That the total gross project cost of$251,844 (HST included) and a net project cost of $226,793 (net of HST rebate) including the total tendered amount and other associated costs be approved; • 3. That the Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer be authorized to fund the project as follows: a) the sum of $191,793 as provided for in the 2012 Capital Budget be funded from the Parkland Reserve Fund; b) the sum of$35,000 be funded from the Third Party Contributions Reserve Fund; and 4. That the appropriate City of Pickering officials be authorized to take necessary action to give effect thereto. • Executive Summary: As part of the 2012 Parks Capital Budget, the construction of Rosebank South Park was approved as a project for the amount of$250,000. Tender No. T-14-2012 was issued on June 29, 2012 and closed on July 17, 2012 with fourteen bidders responding. The low bid of$139,635.23 (HST included) submitted by Colpac Construction Inc., is recommended for approval. The reconstruction of the existing fence along the rail line, pre-purchase of the trees and shrubs for the site, and the supply and installation of the playground structures and safety surfacing were acquired under separate quotations. The total gross project cost is estimated at - $251,844 (HST included) and the total net project cost is estimated at $226,793 (net of HST rebate). r In accordance with Purchasing Policy Item 07.01, the Chief Administrative Officer is authorized to act on behalf of Council during Council recess in approving an award of a project, and the Treasurer is authorized to approve financing for same. Financial Implications: 1.Tender Amount T-14-2012 $123,571.00 HST (13%) 16,064.23 Sub-Total 139,635.23 HST Rebate (11.24%) (13,889.38) Total $125,745.85 2. Approved Source of Funds - 2012 Parks Capital Budget Location Project Code Source of Budget Required • Funds Rosebank South 5780.1221.6129 Parkland $250,000.00 $191,793.00 Park Landscape Reserve Fund Construction 5780.1221.6129 Third Party $0.00 $35,000.00 Contributions R.F. (7501.0091) Total Funds Required • $250,000.00 $226,793.00. 3. Estimated Project Costing Summary T-14-2012 —Tender for Rosebank South Park Landscape Construction $123,571.00 Miscellaneous & Tender Costs 1,500.00 Replacement of Fence along Rail line 8,958.00 Pre-purchase of Trees and Shrubs 15,542.00 Structural Engineering Consultant Fees 2,300.00 Playground Structures and Safety Surfacing 45,000.00 Materials Testing Allowance 1,000.00 Contingency 25,000.00 Total 222,871.00 HST (13%) 28,973.00 Total Gross Project Cost 251,844.00 HST Rebate (11.24%) (25,051.00) July 25, 2012 Page 2 Rosebank South Park Landscape Construction 2 : i Total Net Project Cost $226,793.00 • 1 Net Project Cost (over) Under Approved Funds $23,207.00 In the 2012 Parks Capital Budget, all the funds for this project were coming from the Parkland Reserve Fund. After the budget was approved and based on Subdivision Agreements, it was confirmed that the City of Pickering had received funds from two local developments for financial compensation for tree loss,.to be used for tree and shrub planting in this neighbourhood. As such, the project funding will be supplemented with the $35,000.00 received from these two developments. These funds are deposited in the Third Party Contribution Reserve Fund and will be drawn to fund expenses when incurred. Due to the additional contributions through the Subdivision Agreement, the City's share of the funding amount will be reduced accordingly. As a result, the total savings realized by the City is estimated to be $58;207.00. • • Discussion: The construction of Rosebank South Park was approved as a project in the 2012 Parks Capital Budget. The project includes the cons truction of a children's playground, recycled asphalt and concrete walkways, a steel gazebo, small wooden bridges, a ledge rock retaining wall and seating. A significant planting of native trees and shrubs will also be done as part of the tree removal compensation provided through subdivision agreements from two local developments. The reconstruction of the existing fence along the rail line, pre- purchase of the trees and shrubs for the site, and the supply and installation of the playground structures and safety surfacing were acquired under separate quotations. Tender No. T-14-2012 was issued on June 29, 2012. An advertisement was placed in the Daily Commercial News and on the City's website. The tender closed on July 17, 2012 with 14 bidders responding. The low bid of$139,635.23 (HST included) submitted by Colpac Construction Inc., is recommended for approval. Colpac Construction Inc. has completed a number of similar projects for the City of Pickering including the reconstruction of the play areas at Shadybrook Park, Brockridge Park, Bayridges Kinsmen Park, and Dunmoore Park and the construction of Nature Haven Park. Their workmanship has been deemed acceptable by the Coordinator, Landscape & Parks Development. The Health & Safety Policy, a current WSIB Workplace Injury Summary Report and Clearance Certificate issued by Workplace Safety & Insurance Board, copy of confined space entry procedure, and list of employees trained in confined space entry procedures, as submitted by Colpac Construction Inc. have been reviewed and deemed acceptable by the Coordinator, Health & Safety. The Certificate of Insurance has been reviewed by the Manager, Finance & Taxation and is deemed acceptable. In conjunction with staffs review of the contractor's previous work experience, check of references submitted and the bonding available on this project, the tender is deemed acceptable. Upon careful examination of all tenders and relevant documents received, the Community Services Department, Engineering Services Division recommends the acceptance of the low bid submitted by Colpac Construction Inc. for Tender No. T-14-2012 in the amount of$139,635.23 (HST included) and that the total net project cost of$226,793.00 be approved. Page 3 July 25, 2012 Rosebank South Park Landscape Construction Attachments: 21 2 1. Location Map 2. Summary Memorandum from Supply & Services dated July 17, 2012 Prepared By: Approved/Endorsed By: ..,----N i i /', ��'' J/ , / Everett untsma`-N�'D, CMM Arnold Mostert, GALA Coordinator Director, Community Services Landscape & Parks Development . • I rI {�01.L�4 t� c > C �' 1• D elsky, CET, III 4; APasoftCMA Gillis .Supe isor , Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer Engine;-ring & Capital Works , • / / ilks Vera A. Fe�9emacher Rich rd W. Ho/sorn, P. Eng. CSCMP, CPPO, CPPB, C.P.M., CMM Ill Div' ion Head, Engineering Services _. Manager, Supply & Services `/ 1 . Ca' f ryn Kong, CGA . Li Senior Financial Analyst Capital & Debt Management AM/am • Approval „47,,,:all 3 Tony Prevedel , P. Eng. Chief Administrative Officer July 25, 2012 Page 4 Rosebank South Park Landscape Construction • • • " ' i1.--# PICKERIN . Memo To: Richard Holborn . July 17, 2012 Division Head, Engineering Services From: Vera A. Felgemacher Manager, Supply & Services . Copy: Supervisor, Engineering & Capital Works Subject: Tender No. T-14-2012 Tender for Rosebank South Park Landscape Construction • - File: F-5400-001 • Tenders have been received for the above project. An advertisement was placed the in nthe Daily ily Commercial News and on the City's website inviting companies to download documents for the above mentioned tender. One a tender for this was projected on this project. Fourteen (14) bidders responded and submitted • 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 13.03 (r) provides checking tendered unit prices and extensions unit prices shall govern and extensions will be corrected accordingly, which has been done. All deposits other than the low three bidders may be returned to the applicable bidders as ' provided for by Purchasing Procedure No. PUR 010-001,' Item 13.03(w). Three (3) bids have been retained for review at this time. • Copies of the tenders are attached for your review along with the summary of costs. SUMMARY HST Included Bidder Total Tendered Amount After Calculation Check Colpac Construction Inc. $139,635.23 $139,635.23 Mopal Construction Ltd. $164,754.00 $164,754.00 • Forest Ridge Landscaping Inc. $165,273.18 $165,273.18 Hawkins Contracting Services Ltd. $166,078.93 $166,078.93 TBG Landscape Inc. $173,599.35 $173,599.35 Iron Trio Inc. $177,286.50 $177,286.50 Marnix Infrastructure , $178,334.59 $178,333.24 .52 $205,970.75 Cedar Springs Landscape Group Ltd. $186,125.52 $186,$205,125125.52 Pacific Paving Ltd. 31 794 47, . $247,794.31 Rankine Construction Ltd. $2 $293,053.07 Royalcrest Paving $293,053.07 Civil Underground & Excavation Co. $262,489.96 $265,143.20 Ltd. Automatic rejection—Addendum No. 1 not acknowledged. Reference: Purchasing Policy No. Pine Valley Enterprises Inc. PUR 010, Procedure 23.02, Item 11; Information to Pin Y Bidders — Item 9, 13, 26, 28, 30, 41,42, 43, and Addendum No. 1. Automatic rejection—Addendum No. 1 not acknowledged. Reference: Purchasing Policy No. Terratechnik Environmental PUR 010, Procedure 23.02,Item 11; Information to Bidders - Item 9, 13, 26, 28, 30, 41,42, 43, and Addendum No. 1. Pursuant to Information to Bidders Item 31, the following will be requested of the low bidder for your review during the evaluation stage of this tender call. Please advise when you proceed with this task. (a) A copy of the Health and Safety Policy to e u e on ort ipsoje by Workplace (b) A copy of the current Workplace Injury Summary P Safety & Insurance Board (in lieu of the Workplace reports may be o � document, a copy of the current CAD 7, NEER, o submitted); (c) A copy of the current Clearance Certificate issued by Workplace Safety & Insurance Board; (d) Proof of compliance with amended Confined Space Entry Regulations (September 30, 2006). Copies of certified Training and Procedures to be used ' on this project; (e) A list of employees trained in the confined space entry procedure who will be working on this project; (f) The City's certificate of insurance or approved alternative form shall be completed by the bidder's agent, broker or insurer; (g) list of Sub-Contractors in accordance with General Conditions Item 32; (h) Waste Management Plan to be used on this project in accordance with Tendering Specifications Item 19. Refer to Item 07.01 of the Purchasing Policy for approvals during Council recess. Please include the following items in your Report to CAO: (a) if items (a) through (e) noted above, are acceptable to the Co-ordinator, Health.& Safety; (b) if item (f) — Insurance — is acceptable to the Manager, Finance &Taxation; July 17, 2012 Page 2 Tender No. T-14-2012 Tender for Rosebank South Park Landscape Construction (c) any past work experience with the low bidder Colpac Construction Inc. including work 21 5 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; and • (i) 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. If y u require further information, please feel free to contact me or a member of Supply & Ser ices. VAF/jg Attachments • July 17, 2012 Page 3 Tender No. T-14-2012 Tender for Rosebank South Park Landscape Construction 3 tv 9 1 A i— � T N Q. ss (4. ` M) 4 Ars o, E c Qt.: i 11/4- I \r, '■% r\,,'. %0- LI 13I .' t to O YN: . ' r O .'� . Q l... T E0) 63 E0) E0) t0) E0) E0) t0) to (0) t) E0) b9 N O 6 U c . 1 c. if I � p I J O N G m \ \ \ \ \ A \ \ \ I M L V3 O .0) t. I 3 �✓1 . o% `. a o N o N o o Ns. Ns4 i L • w 6 i a) 0 a. d \ ‘) la 1 C •a r d 1-- d O 30 C 'C c . 1 O Q v .) a. N _ Q . .0 .r cl) 04 0 C . . 0 f" - � L ms -xs o 0] se 0 U 13. J a c En U O0 O a) • c > o 13 c- co c O C o O U 0 c Q. a> x -� (n c 'a -6 N w c L.. c -p p Q c O ._O 2 t) c O U U C O -) C J Q O j N � 3'0 0 U .+ -a a J -o c u, 1 0) o w c +c N m O N ...` W O: Y c m f0 — O O 0 C • •.N N U ON S O w N C) 'D 0 a. C . L cis Y U N .2 x U C Y (0 it:J N CS > 8 a) .0 as N Q f0 _I 7 al O. O 'O • ,- c U > O (0 O m O O 0. U J' 0' 2 U H L.L. n C U J f'- 217 N v- O N N c f9 d • H C O V • V 0 a. 0 m ' co 0 c O • (3 CO . a) U C O o 2 G O N O O m 0 c m m `k -.C2) c. O a .•---;- \1,. : . . ,: • >:"\\'. tic° - . . - . T h N o • O .y C W ,■ I-- ,\� 4. a \v w_____ < . --il- y\ -N.2,-..-\ ----\ 1_,,, ,........._,..,(\.. _____ „ , It.`,..... ., U 1 1 • RECEIVED A ACH ENT# G TO REM #_` �(--/; CITY OF PICKEFIING g ;14. AUG 1 .4 2012 �; Memo CORPORATE SERVICE ®ffice of the CAO 1101131It E O�I C K �Receive'd AUG 1 3 2012 CITY AUG 1 4 2012 file - To: Tony Prevedel • Follow Up August 5, 2012 Chief Administrative OfficeSUPPLY AND SERVICE' • Mayor Corn Sery Council C&R • From: Everett Buntsma Directors • Eng Services Director, Community Services SMT Oper& Fac Clerk • Corp Services Copy: Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer Fire Office Sustain Division Head, Engineering Services Human Res Plan & Dev Manager, Supply & Services Legal & LS . Supervisor, Engineering & Capital Works Subject: Tender No. T-18-2012 • West Shore Boulevard, Road Improvements Oklahoma Drive to Sunrise Avenue - File: A-1440 Overview: Tender No. T-18-2012 for West Shore Boulevard Road Improvements Oklahoma Drive to Sunrise Avenue includes both road improvements and storm sewer works. These works were approved as two projects in the 2011 Capital Budget, and is the subject of this memo. In accordance with Purchasing Policy Item 06.12, where the compliant quotation or tender meeting specifications and offering best value to the City is acceptable and the estimated total purchase price is over $125,000, the Manager may approve the award, subject to consultation with the appropriate Director, Treasurer, CAO and Council. • Furthermore, in accordance with Purchasing Policy Item 07.01, the Chief Administrative Officer is • authorized to act on behalf of.Council during Council recess in approving an award of a project, and the Treasurer is authorized to approve financing of same. • Recommendation: 1. That Tender No.T-18-2012 submitted by Wyndale Paving Company Limited at a cost of $448,780.57 (HST included) be accepted; 2. That the total gross project cost of$500,987 (HST included) and a net project cost of $451,154 (net of HST rebate) including the tender amount and other associated costs be approved; • 3. That the Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer finance the project as follows: 9 a) the sum of$275,000 for the West Shore Boulevard Road Improvements — Oklahoma Drive to Sunrise Avenue be financed by an internal loan over a period not to exceed ten years at a rate to be determined; b) the balance of$1,213.00 for the West Shore Boulevard Road Improvements— Oklahoma Drive to Sunrise Avenue be funded from property taxes; c) the sum of$14,478.50 for the growth related West Shore Boulevard- Storm Sewer Works be funded from the Development Charges Reserve Fund; d) the sum of$28,484.50 for the growth related West Shore Boulevard- Storm Sewer Works be funded from the City's Share DC Reserve; e) the sum of $118,780.20 as provided for in the 2011 Capital Budget for Oil Grit Separators be funded from the City's Share DC Reserve; f) the sum of $13,197.80 as provided for in the 2011 Capital Budget for Oil Grit Separators be funded from the Development Charges Reserve Fund; and • 4. That the appropriate City of Pickering officials be authorized to take necessary action to give effect thereto. Executive. Summary: This memo serves to report the results of Tender No. T-18-2012 for the West Shore Boulevard Improvements—Oklahoma Drive to Sunrise Avenue. The low bid submitted by Wyndale Paving Company Limited in the amount of$448,780.57 (HST included), and a total net project cost of$451,154 (net of HST rebate) is recommended for approval. Financial Implications: 1. Tender Amount $397,150.95 Tender No. T-18-2012 $39977,150.95 HST (13%) 448,780.57 Gross Tender Amount (44,639.77) HST Rebate (11.24%) U_0_4140.80 Net Tender Amount August 8, 2012 Page 2 Tender No. T-18-2012 West Shore Boulevard, Road Improvements Oklahoma Drive to Sunrise Avenue 2. Approved Source of Funds Roads and External Subdivision Capital Budget Location Project Code Source of Funds $3B0 Oget00 Required re 0 Tender No. T-18-2012 5320.1118.6250 Debt West Shore Boulevard 5320.1118.6250 Internal Loan-10 Year 0.00 275,000.00 5320.1118.6250 Property Taxes 0.00 1 ,213.00 West Shore Boulevard- 5320.1118.6250 Development Storm Sewer Works Charges Reserve 0.00 14,478.50 (Growth Related) Fund (33.7%) West Shore Boulevard- 5320.1118.6250 City's Share DC 0.00 28,484.50 Storm Sewer Works Reserve (Growth Related) (66.3%) (4) Oil Grit Separators 5321.1107.6253 City's Share DC 270,000.00 118,780.20 Reserve (90%) 5321.1107.6253 Development 30,000.00 13,197.80 Charges Reserve • Fund (10%) Total $630,000.00 $451,154.00 3. Breakdown of Cost-West Shore Boulevard and Oil Grit Separators West Shore Blvd Oil Grit Separators Total Improvements Project Code 5320.1118.6250 5321.1107.6253 Budget $330,000.00 $300,000.00 $630,000.00 Estimated Project Cost Tender No. T-18-2012 279,456.00 117,695.00 397,151.00 Associated Cost: 6,200.00 Miscellaneous, Tender & 6,200.00 Material Testing Contingency 28,000.00 12,000.00 40,000.00 Total Cost 313,656.00 129,695.00 443,351.00 HST (1.76%) 5,520.00 2,283.00 7,803.00 Net Project Cost to City 319,176.00, 131,978.00 451,154.00, August 8, 2012 Page 3 Tender No. T-18-2012 . West Shore Boulevard, Road Improvements Oklahoma Drive to Sunrise Avenue Net Position (Over) Under $10,824.00 $168,022.00, $178,846.00 221 4. Breakdown of Growth Related & Improvements Works at West Shore Boulevard City's Work - New -Growth Total Improvements Related Tender Amount 241,156.00 38,300.00 279;456.00 Misc & Material 6,200.00 6,200.00 Testing 3,920.00 28,000.00 Contingency 24,080.00 Total 271,436.00 42,220.00 313,656.00 New HST Cost to City 4,777.00 743.00 5,520.00 (1.76%) ' Net Project Cost to 276,213.00 42,963,00 319,176.00 City 5. Estimated Project Costing Summary $397,151.00 Tender No. T-18=2012• Shore Vert Sun se Avenue • Improvements —Oklahoma 5,000.00 Materials Testing 5,000.00 . Miscellaneous Costs 1,200.00 Contingency 443,351.00 Sub Total— Costs 57,636.00 HST (13%) 500,987.00 Total Gross Project Costs (49,833.00)7. HST Rebate (11.24%) 5451.154.00 Total Net Project Costs Net Project Costs (over) under Approved Funds I $178,846.00 At the time of writing this memo, it has come to the Treasurer's attention that of the works related to West Shore Boulevard- Storm Sewer Works are related management works to maintain the ecological system evelo of ent Frenchman's This proposal was included in the with respect to the potential impacts from future development. Development Charges Background Study (n 005oWt Thus�this hwork is development charges eligible for have been collected, but work did not proceed development charges funding. The funding ratio will be based on what C)was approved Fund the 33.7%.2005 Study in the ratio of City's Share 66.3/o and Development Note that as the City did not collect non-residential DC in the 2005 Study for the storm water management service category, this portion has bee.s included of in non-re of DC e funding 18%ratio. This works out to be 18 of the 66.3% of City's of the 85% of eligible DC cost). Page 4 August 8, 2012 . Tender No. T-18-2012 West Shore Boulevard, Road Improvements Oklahoma Drive to Sunrise Avenue • Table 4 above provides the breakdown of the new work required due to growth and road 2 2 2 improvements work. This breakdown is needed in order to determine the portion deemed eligible for development charges funding. The main component of the road improvements work will be funded 100% by City. The City's share of the growth related portion in the amount of$28,484.50 will be funded from the City's Share DC Reserve; a matching fund set aside for this purpose. The City's share of the cost for the West Shore Boulevard Road Improvements has been approved in the 2011 Budget as a 10-year debt. It is necessary to report to Council on projects requiring debt financing in order to formalize the borrowing. This project was tendered in late July 2012, and did not make it to the last Council meeting before the summer recess. In order to formalize this debt before the Council recess, Recommendation 2 a) of Report to Council CST 21-12 dated July 9, 2012, approved for a debenture issue in the sum of$330,000 based on the budget amount approved in the 2011 Capital Budget for this project. Since the actual funding required for the City's share of$275,000 is lower than the original budget, an internal loan not to exceed 10 years will be issued in lieu of debentures as provided for under Recommendation 2g) of Report CST 21-12. The balance of the City's share will be funded from property taxes. The Oil Grit Separators for the Frenchman's Bay watershed was budgeted for four locations at an estimated cost of$75,000 per location. The locations were to be determined at a later date. Currently, two locations have been determined: West Shore Boulevard and Browning Avenue. Based on the results of Tender No. T-18-2012, the cost came in higher than estimated; only two of the four locations can be accommodated from this budget. The Oil Grit Separators for West Shore Boulevard has been included in Tender T-18-2012. The balance of the unspent funds in the approximate amount of$168,000 will be reserve for the Browning Avenue location. Funds required for the remaining two separators will be re-budgeted in future. Discussions: As part of the 2011 Roads Capital Budget, West Shore Boulevard, Road Improvements—Oklahoma Drive Sunrise Avenue was approved as a project. In the same year, the Oil Grit Separators was approved under the External Subdivision Budget. These two projects are combined together on Tender No. T-18-2012. Tender No. T-18-2012 was issued on Friday, July 13, 2012 and closed Wednesday, August 1, 2012. Requests for tenders were invited from companies of which five responded by the official closing date and time. . The low bid submitted by Wyndale Paving Company Limited is recommended for approval. Wyndale Paving Company Limited is currently working for the City on Tender No.T-10-2012 for the East Shore Community Centre Parking Lot Improvements and Tender No. T-2-2012 for Liverpool Road, Road Reconstruction, Storm Sewer and Boulevard Work, and is deemed. acceptable by the Supervisor, Engineering & Capital Works. The Health & Safety Policy, a current August 8, 2012 Page 5 Tender No. T-18-2012 West Shore Boulevard, Road Improvements Oklahoma Drive to Sunrise Avenue 223 WSIB Workplace Injury Summary Report and Certificate of Clearance issued by Workplace Safety & Insurance Board, confined space entry procedure and a list of employees trained in Confined Space Training, as submitted by Wyndale Paving Company Limited, have been reviewed by the Coordinator, Health & Safety and deemed acceptable. The Certificate of Insurance has been reviewed by the Manager, Finance & Taxation and is deemed acceptable. In conjunction with staff's review of the consultant's previous work experience, check of references submitted and the bonding available on this project, the tender is deemed acceptable. Upon careful examination of the tender and relevant documents received, the Community Services Department, Engineering Services Division recommends acceptance of the low bid submitted by Wyndale Paving Company.Limited for Tender No. T-18-2012 in the amount of $448,780.57 (HST included) and that the total net project cost of$451,154 (net of HST rebate) be approved. • Attachments: 1. Supply & Services Memorandum dated August 1, 2012 2. Location Map Prepared By: Approved/Endorsed By: c . ' r .7_61 '' sky ' ,--- - 1)61/ iii" ------ Bunts , Darrell Selsky, CET, MM III 1,,Evere Bt a NPD, CMM Supervisor, Engineering & Capital Works Dire or, Community Services y �) Vera A. Felgemacher Gillis Paterson, CMA CSCMP, CPPO, CPPB, C.P.M., CMMIII Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer Manager, Supply & Services • Caryn Kong, CGA Senior Financial Analyst Capital & Debt Management Page 6 August 8, 2012 Tender No. T-18-2012 West Shore Boulevard, Road Improvements Oklahoma Drive to Sunrise Avenue X24 Richa d Holbv/n, P. Eng. Divi on Head, Engineering Services DS:ds Approval (4/1)„ 11(7 2.012, Tony Prevedel, P.Eng. Chief Administrative Officer • August 8, 2012 Page 7 Tender No. T-18-2012 West Shore Boulevard, Road Improvements_ Oklahoma Drive to Sunrise Avenue • r) r)(.itq o0 ui . x-� .,... I ;Ie' wt uj1�, 7 __ PI KERING Memo To: Richard Holborn • August 1, 2012 Division Head, Engineering Services . . From: Vera A. Felgemacher . Manager, Supply & Services Copy: Supervisor, Engineering & Capital Works . • Subject: Tender No. T-18-2012 Tender for West Shore Boulevard — Road Reconstruction, - Oklahoma Drive to Sunrise Avenue _ • - File: F=5400-001 . . 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 for the above mentioned tender. Eight (8) bidders responded and submitted a tender for this project. 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 13.03 (r) provides checking tendered unit • prices and extensions unit prices shall govern and extensions will be corrected accordingly, which has been done. All deposits other than the low three bidders may be returned to the applicable bidders as provided for by Purchasing Procedure No..PUR 010-001, Item 13.03(w). Three (3) bids have been retained for review at this time. Copies of the tenders are attached for your review along with the summary of costs.. . SUMMARY • • HST Included Total.Tendered Bidder After Calculation Check • Amount Wyndale Paving Co. Ltd. $448,780.57 $448,780.57 Mar - King Construction Company Ltd. $465,663.91 $465,663.56 Coco Paving Inc. $485,254.77 $485,254.77. . Bennington Construction Ltd. - $492,652.88 $492,652.88_ Hollingworth Construction Ltd. $511,154.37 $511,154.37 Royalcrest Paving Ltd. $513,540.37 $513,540.37 Midome Construction • $529,800.50 $529,800.50 Miwel Construction $658,005.69 $658,005.58 • Pursuant to Information to Bidders Item 28, the following will be requested of the low bid urs for your review during the evaluation stage of this tender call. Please advise when you wish 6 'proceed with this task. copy(a) A co of the Health and Safety Policy to be used on this project (currently dated and signed); Summary Report issued by Workplace Safety (b) A copy.of the current Workplace Injury & Insurance Board (in lieu of the Workplace Injury Summar be y Report ped)ocument, a copy of the current CAD 7, NEER, or MAP reports y (c) A copy of the current Clearance Certificate issued by Workplace Safety & Insurance ( ) mended Confined Space Entry Regulations (September Board; (d) Proof of compliance with a used 30, 2006). Copies of certified Training and Procedures to beds e on this project; • (e) A list of employees trained in the confined space entry p working on this project; approved alternative form shall be completed by (f) The City's certificate of insurance or app the bidder's agent, broker or insurer; (g) .list of Sub-Contractors in accordance with this General in aditiio s Item v3 h Tendering (h) Waste Management Plan to be used on project Specifications Item 18. . • Refer to Item 07.01 of the Purchasing Policy for approvals during Council recess. Please include the following items in your Report to CAO: Health & (a) if items (a) through (e) noted above, are acceptable to the Co-ordinator, He Safety; (b) if item(f) — Insurance — is acceptable to ddeManager,le Paving Co. _tdl including work • (c) any past work experience with the low bidder Y _ location; . information is (d) without past work experience, if ref{o Which this work is to be ctharged; (e) the appropriate account number(s) (f) the budget amount(s) assigned thereto; (g) Treasurer's confirmation of funding; (h) related departmental approvals; (I) related comments specific to the project. Please do not disclose any information to enquiries except you direct he Bidders to the wi II s website for the unofficial bid results as read out at the public ten der opening. advised of the outcome in due course. If yo require further information, please feel free to contact me or a member of Supply & Sery\ces. /1:\ - (..---• i--) VAF/jg Attachments August 1, 2012 Page 2 Tender No. T-18-2012 Tender for West Shore Boulevard — Road . - - Oklahoma Drive to Sunrise Avenue • O • . b4 Z CW GG . G . 0 • h c •• • U U d E y N Q L in -o c r c 0 u r � _ v) p O 4+ p iJ & G . fsl i •' ry) 1.v y� 'L Q iiii .a Q SL >7. J1 . . o ca aj £ -a - c a a • U• 0 6.C Co .• U' c N i c N N U .•• • 0 < O e= O ID not 1"'•. Y UJ 'B a . O o C.) CI- .c a Q . Z Ow • 12 N m A m Z d c N r,� n c\ �o. c- c� 1 Uw 3 o -oO :o O > . p C �� o O y . ' a I • 5. _ • C LI. c o N :w --,,., Lir) \I • c c0 -p ‘' 4) .V. i . :.....:: ." • '6 ' ;• , ',.. ' ,. i Z 3 c \ L a N u C y N (1) C E cn a a' c U Z m A� • F- co 0 - -� ° o . w .Z cu 0) U c o � c o S 0 . dS Ed o U) C O • n_ t' •o) LL • \'• ►• Ed U c o rn o > o •- rn a� a� 3 a H EU c a c`� co rn CO} ,(' ,1 c c o f_ 0 •-a 3 a' 8 v o >' o o•. _i .. ' m 2Li cc• 3 I v U U City 00 ,iai1 ' 2 Q 0. SIONIO��Iel ENGINEERING SERVICES DIVISION . Attachment for Tender T-18-2012 __ i 7 h P` W \\R O COURT w a OKL4HOMA U O LI -VI Q GALLANT / ABINGDON) I /O — O O r 7 U y\ A CRT. A �_ r J a m J COURT' A -1 O Y [D 74 [MINK STREET rn Si L-/ �TONEBRIDGE ml T 1 U tt 2 w/ oN\ 81� ROAD > I L I [ RAVE.`CC E� �+T COURT fil O O JV7Jl.l DOWNLAND •fl -1 I - / AREA . �/ �T 7\SURE, ruLL0 O ENGEL u cRF O�i�F a Sr DE �� O w FkVF�[ H" t AVE. POtt,, W U W e-P H _ BRIAN VICTOR n K m 3 CRy—f. RT. r Q Y 1 ? � � - L a — \� ` a� / �BROADGREEN '1, Fly f qQ LAKE ONTARIO GREEK ____' Location Map —West Shore Boulevard • Proposed Construction Includes: Complete reconstruction and of West Shore Boulevard which includes; • Re-installation of a new and wider road, complete with concrete curb and gutter, new granular base and base asphalt (wider road will accommodate parking and bike lanes); • The road widening will be offset in an effort to preserve the mature trees in the east boulevard • The installation of an Oil-Grit separator as indicated; • Re-installation of new and wider 1.8m concrete sidewalk (east side) Restoration to Project Site • Complete boulevard restoration to all areas affected by construction (fine grading and sodding where required); and • Complete Road line painting and signage as required. . ATTACHMENT#_I TO REPORT#, (sr..?se- City o -_ 2 9 O Office of the CA e m o Received AUG 0 3 20 IICINSI4N IOC File :- Follow Up Mayor Com Sery To: Tony Prevedel Council C&R Ai��ust 3, 2012 Chief Administrative Officer Directors Eng Services SMT Oper & Fac Clerk Corp Services From: Gillis A. Paterson Office Sustain Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer Fire , Human Res Plan & Dev Copy: Manager, Information Technology Legal& LS Manager, Accounting Services - Manager, Finance & Taxation Manager, Supply &Services • Senior Purchasing Analyst Subject: Ricoh Print Management Proposal and Purchase of Print Management Software - File: F-5000-001 Recommendations: 1. That the proposal received from Ricoh Canada, based on the terms of Standing Agreement VOR-1027 from the Ministry of Government Services of the Province of Ontario for the provision of multi-function devices and printers be accepted as follows: i. monthly hardware rental amount of$5,065.12 (HST extra) • ii. estimated cost per copy per month based on a blended rate of$0.0099 resulting in an estimated monthly amount of$5,022.68 (HST extra) 2. That an estimated net total annual cost of$119,953.72 after savings, an increase of$4,903 . over current costs, be accepted; 3. That the purchase of Print Management software at a cost of$34,960.00 (HST extra) be charged to cost centre 2196-5974-0000 (non-budgeted) to be financed from anticipated under expenditures and costs avoided through this contract in the Information Technology budget be approved; . • 4. Further that the appropriate City of Pickering officials be authorized to take necessary action to give effect thereto. • • Executive Summary: In review of the RFP results provided by the Province and in L consultation with the Manager, Information Technology and the Senior Purchasing Analyst, it is recomr rerniect•tha: tfie-ERQ-a roye•tfe- mplementation of the proposal from Ricoh Canada utilizing the Standing Agr mertt selected by the Province and offered to the broader public sector.; ' .. .i The contract with Ricoh will be in the for of a five year rental agreement with cancellation privilege as_apposed to a fixed term°*.1sq. Given the foregoing, having an operating agreement extendjng beyond the current term of Coincil_is not a problem as the agreement can be cancelled, with pro rated penalty. Furthermore, thisgreement is not deemed material and therefore the Lease Policy need not apply. f # Financial Implications: 1. u"rrenf Annual�osr • Annual contract cost—Toshiba —21 single function $28,000.00 photocopiers Annual HP Printer Cost— 187 units — Consumables 49,000.00 Annual HP Printer Repair Costs 3,600.00 Annual Cost to upgrade,existing copiers • 6,000.00 Current annual paper cost 27,500.00 Estimated annual energy cost 950.00 Current Annual Cost $115.050.00 2. Proposed Annual Contract Cost- Ricoh Annual cost— Equipment - $5,065.12 per month x 12 months $60,781.44 Estimated annual total cost per copy (CPC) - $5,022.68 per month x 12 months 60,272.16 Current annual paper cost 27,500.00 Total Annual Cost $148.553.60 3. Estimated Net Annual Increase Net Increase $33,503.60 Less—estimate annual HP printer repairs (3,600.00) Less—estimated annual HP printer replacement (five year average) (21,000.00) Less—estimated saving paper cost (4,000.00) Less —energy savings TBD Estimated net annual contract cost increase $4.903.60 August 3, 2012 Page 2 Ricoh Print Management Proposal and Purchase of Print Management Software 4. Print Management Software Print Management Software — One time cost only $34,960.00 Savings 2012 — scanner not required (3,000.00) Systems scan for credit card numbers underexpenditure (7,000.00) Back up Tape Replacements — not required (1,000.00) GIS —to be rebudgeted in 2013 as a larger project (23,960.00) Net additional one time cost • Finally, the net cost after savings will be equal to or less than the estimated cost of upgrading the photocopiers. Therefore, it is recommended staff proceed with the Ricoh proposal. Discussion: The City currently operates 21 single function departmental photocopiers, which are leased from Toshiba Canada. The original 60 month lease agreement expired on July 31, 2010, and was extended a further 24 months to July 31, 2012. The contract has been further extended on a month to month basis for a maximum of three additional months pending consideration of this report. Please note that this proposal does not include replacing the Xerox Model DT4127 production copier in the Copy/Print room, which is leased under a separate 66 month agreement with Xerox Canada and does not expire until 2015. When Council approved the last photocopier contract to Toshiba Canada, Report CS 54-05, also approved the following: "4. The Director, Corporate Services and Treasurer be authorized to alter terms, conditions and/or supplier(s) if necessary in order to meet, maintain and provide departmental photocopy services for the City." The City's Purchasing Policy (Section 17.01) allows for the use of a co-operative method of purchasing with public agencies when advantageous and practical, so long as a competitive method of acquisition is used, consistent with our Purchasing Policy. In this regard, the provincial Ministry of Government Services completed an RFP process in 2010 for the selection of a Vendor of Record (VOR)for Print Imaging Technologies and Services. The Province committed considerable resources on this project and has obtained competitive pricing based on Provincial volumes. VOR-1027 was placed in effect on February.1, 2010 and released to the broader public sector on April 26, 2010. The Province has extended the term of VOR-1027 to January 31, 2013. • Ricoh Canada Inc. has been awarded a contract by the Province as a result of the RFP process for the provision of multi-function devices (MFD), which provides machines that print, scan, facsimile and copy. Terms of the contract fixes an annual rental rate and a cost per copy (CPC) rate for various models for a term up to 60 months. All of the terms, conditions, benefits, service level agreements and pricing have been set out for any eligible organization in the broader public August 3, 2012 Page 3 Ricoh Print Management Proposal and Purchase of Print Management Software sector wanting to participate in the VOR program. The terms, conditions, pricing and service level agreements are not negotiable as they are the same for all participants in the VOR program 3 ? Further to the awarding of this contract by the Province, and consistent with the City's Purchasing Policy, a comprehensive review of the deficiencies of the existing equipment and the needs of the City for multi-function devices (print, scan, facsimile and copy), was conducted by the Information. Technology section of Corporate Services and Ricoh Canada. Ricoh Canada provides,a value added service of reviewing current equipment allocations,and usages, which is compared against recognized industry standards and then provides recommendations on equipment requirements and the reorganizing and reducing the current fleet. This review is aligned with our sustainable initiatives to achieve savings in energy and paper consumption. The deployment of multi-function photocopiers, which provides print, scan, facsimile and photocopy functions will assist the City in reducing costs associated with copying and printing. Networking of the departmental photocopiers with print functions will enable the Information Technology section to significantly reduce the number of departmental and desktop printers, realizing a substantial cost savings. This review encompassed all copiers and printers across all City facilities. In addition, document handling and security considerations were incorporated in the review. 1. Ricoh Proposal As a result of the review of our current equipment, Ricoh has proposed reducing the City's current fleet of 202 devices (photocopiers, printers, scanners & facsimiles) by implementing the following equipment, eventually reducing the number of machines to 56 units consisting of: • 14 - Multi- Function Devices — B/W 20 - Multi-Function Devices — Color 1 - Desktop Multi-function Devices - Color 16 - Printers - B/W 5 - Printers — Color Although the implementation of Ricoh's proposal will result in a justifiably higher annual expense, Information Technology has identified the following annual cost savings as indicated in the Financial Implications Section of this memo. 2. Print Management Software In conjunction with the implementation of Ricoh proposal for MFP devices and upgraded printers, print management software is also recommended by the IT section which will enable the following benefits: a) Security Staff will be required to use an individual security card to print from any networked device which will result in a number of security enhancements. Printing can only occur once the employee has swiped their security card. Printouts left on the printer because they were forgotten will become a thing of the past. Print jobs submitted but not printed will be automatically deleted after 24 hours and if the print is initiated and a change is determined, the print job can be left to expire without August 3, 2012 Page 4 Ricoh Print Management Proposal and Purchase of Print Management Software •wiring the cost of the printout. The print management software will identify staff who has scanned, faxed, and printed documents and if the document is being printed from LaserFiche, the security logs will also identify the document's name. Unauthorized usage of the Ricoh MFPs will not be possible. Documents scanned and faxed will reside on the Ricoh MFP's disk drive and the drive is encrypted to Department of Defense (DoD) standards and is very secure. If the disk drive were removed from the Ricoh MFP, the documents stored on it would not be retrievable. b) Device Management Currently, the City is unable to track who is printing what or how much. The print management software will permit the City to determine who can print color, how many sheets an individual can by print during a given time period, track hi be a considerable eeducgonrl in the number pr rated department. The predicted resulted w sheets. c) Print Anywhere Printouts would print on the Ricoh MFP where the employee swipes their card. If the initiation of the printout occurs within the Civic Complex, but the meeting is at a remote site, the printout can occur at the remote site; thus, eliminating potentially unnecessary copies being printed. d) Departmental Charge-back As a result of the City being able to track who is actually printing, departments can now be assessed costs directly related to their usage. In addition to the cost per copy, it can also be determined how many sheets each department is using; thus, the paper costs could be accurately allocated. New G/L accounts will setup within each cost center starting in 2013. The budgets will reflect these changes. e) Allocation of Resources The print management software would permit the City to determine the areas where the MFPs are mostly used and if the resource usage is supportable. Re-allocation of resources could occur and at minimum, accurate usage numbers would be available during the next replacement cycle. 3. Project Benefits Previous undertakings have concentrated on replacing photocopiers on a one-to-one basis, viewing the photocopier as a copying device rather than a multi-functional device. Information Technology in conjunction with Supply & Services, is proposing to implement a new strategy and a proactive approach to print management. The strategy is to replace all photocopiers and printers with networked multi-functional devices that are capable of performing as printers, scanners, facsimiles and photocopiers. Rather than viewing devices as separate units with separate functionalities, this approach will view the multi-functional device as a print management center. By implementing a multi-functional approach and with the utilization of print g management data security,software, the City will realize improvements in paper-resource management, da Y reduction, and staff and process efficiencies. The Ricoh proposal will enable the City to strategically embrace the future rather than the present day-to-day needs. The greatest benefit is Page 5 August 3, 2012 Ricoh Print Management Proposal and Purchase of Print Management Software the introduction of a state-of-the-art document management solution to replace the current seven year old technology, which will greatly increase efficiency and reduce the copying and printins'4 costs of the City. The Ricoh proposal will introduce a managed service; eliminating the need for staff to order print cartridges, and for IT to maintain the current fleet of printers. Staff efforts can be redirected to higher priority issues. Records management and document security is greatly enhanced by relying on electronic documents rather than printed sheets. The number of pages printed by individual and departments will be monitored having the effect of reducing the number of printed pages. 4. Non Financial Benefits The following identifies those project benefits and initiatives that do not necessarily have an associated cost savings. a) Carbon-footprint Reduction Ricoh is one of the greenest companies in the world. Their manufacturing plants are carbon neutral. The Ricoh implementation would result in the City reducing its yearly carbon footprint by approximately 1 tonne. This equates to a reduction of 5 tonnes over the life of the contract. Continuing the strategy.of communication centers rather than perpetuating the installation of multitudinous printers, the CO2 reduction would be maintained, if not increased. Environmentally, the Ricoh proposal will greatly reduce the City's paper usage and eliminating a substantial number of ink cartridges reducing the amount of landfill waste and the energy required for their manufacture, distribution, and end-of-life disposal. Ricoh is predicting the City's CO2 footprint will be reduced by one tonne per year which fully encompasses the City's sustainability directive and efforts, The annual printed pages is expected to be reduced by 75,000, not only reducing paper consumption, but also the ink cartridges that previously would have been required. The CO2 saved from the felling of trees through to the manufacture of the ink cartridges would be quite substantial. The energy savings by reducing or fleet and replacing non-efficient devices with energy efficient devices will be substantial. Without having the energy requirements of every device being eliminated, it would be difficult to provide an accurate number, but there would definitely be a CO2 reduction with a reduction in land-fill requirements for spent cartridges. b) Foundation for Future Phases Implementing the Ricoh proposal, as recommended, will permit the City to look beyond its current way of conducting its business and permit methods and efficiencies better suited for today's environment as well as the future. During 2013, it is envisioned that departmental LaserFiche and workflow analysis would start with Accounts Payable, resulting in staff efficiencies, reduced paper flow leading to automatic record keeping, workflow, and archiving. The 2013 Budget contains $22,000 for a LaserFiche upgrade that is required regardless of the Ricoh project. The budget also contains $8,000 for consulting to perform the necessary workflow analysis August 3, 2012 Page 6 Ricoh Print Management Proposal and Purchase of Print Management Software C 2 7, 5 c) Reduction in City Costs due to Ontario's VoR Program Previously, the City developed its own RFQ, analysed the results, and then proceeded to enter into a 5-year lease. The entire process would have required both time and effort from Supply & Services and IT employees. In future;the City will participate in the Vendor of Record (VoR) program; thus, saving the cost and effort of performing the required investigation and analysis. d) Managed Service - Currently, IT is responsible for the maintenance of installed printers. The Ricoh proposal would transfer support to Ricoh and eliminate this requirement; thus, permitting IT to enhance the service levels in other support areas. e) Facsimile • Faxes can be sent by any PC through a Ricoh MFP that is fax ready. The sending of the fax will be logged for security reasons. Faxes can also be received and then forwarded electronically to the named recipient without printing one sheet of paper. 5. Project Phases Currently the project entails three phases. Phase 1 — 2012 - Implementation of Ricoh proposal. Phase 2 — 2013 - The 2013 Budget contains $22,000 for the Departmental Laserfiche upgrade. This upgrade will provide the foundation to assist in achieving workflow efficiencies and enhanced archiving capabilities. Workflow analysis within Planning & Development to identify opportunities for efficiencies in staff time, reduce paper flow and automated record keeping, workflows and archiving. Costs of analysis are estimated to be between $8,000 to $10,000. Phase 3 — 2014 -Workflow analysis across the Corporation with a mind to streamlining paper and work flows to provide efficiencies in staff time and improve record and archive information. For example, Clerks, Tax and Accounts Payable areas. • Page 7 August 3, 2012 Ricoh Print Management Proposal and Purchase of Print Management Software Prepared By: Approved/Endorsed By: .*4: -.--- - ,L _(/,Pekie& :7/ .-.1 7 A Gillis A. Paterson Tony Prevedel Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer Chief Administrative Officer eiL------- _ • lJon orms Ma ager, Information Technology 1 /' ob K-'zma i Senior Pur lasing Analyst August 3, 2012 Page 8 Ricoh Print Management Proposal and Purchase of Print Management Software ? 3 ?cif,/ oo _ Report To 1,_, Executive Committee T� T1�T PIT C-KERI v G Report Number: CST 27-12 Date: September 10, 2012 From: Gillis A. Paterson Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer Subject: Write-off of Fire Services Costs Associated with the Claremont General Store Fire Recommendation: . 1. That Report CST 27-12 of the Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer be received; and, 2. That the outstanding amount receivable from Seongmin Park & Kyungjoo Sung in the amount of $13,750.99 and accumulated interest of $2,853.18 be written off in 2012; and 3. That the appropriate officials of the City of Pickering be authorized to take the necessary actions to give effect hereto. Executive Summary: Efforts by the Treasurer and the City Solicitor to recover the City's costs have proven partially successful with the owner of the store agreeing to pay $7,000 of the $20,750 owing for demolitions and fencing for the burned out general • store in Claremont. It is staff's opinion that the remaining balance and accumulated interest should be written off. . Financial Implications: Under the Council approved Financial Control Policy, any write-off of an uncollectible amount greater than $10,000 requires the approval of Council. If Council approves the recommendations of this report, then the expense will be • charged to account 2136 — Provision for Accounts Receivable Write-off. During the course of finalizing the year end for 2011, a provision of $16,604 was made in case this particular account receivable had to be written off. As a result, the proposed write-off will have no impact on the City's financial position for the year 2012. Report CST 27-12 September 10, 2012 0x9 Subject: Write-off Fire Services Costs Associated with Page 2 the Claremont General Store Fire Discussion: In 2009, Pickering's Fire Services were called to a fire at the Claremont General Store. Being of wood construction and being very old, the building was quickly engulfed in flames. Once the fire was extinguished, Fire Services deemed the remaining structure unsafe and called in a contractor to tear it down and fence the area so the public would not be in danger. The total cost for the demolition and fencing was $20,750. According to the owner of the store, his insurance was not sufficient to pay for the reconstruction of the store and these costs. Discussions have been undertaken with the owner and the City Solicitor has negotiated with the owner's lawyer. The end result is that the owner is able to pay only $7,000 towards the demolition costs. The City looked at the possibility of including these costs on the tax roll but found them to be ineligible. All efforts to recover more have been unsuccessful, therefore, it is recommended that the balance of $13,750 plus accumulated interest of $2,853 be written off in 2012. This report and its recommendations have been reviewed with the City Solicitor who concurs. Attachments: None Prepared /Approved / Endorsed By: Gillis A. Paterson, CMA Director, Corporate Services &Treasurer Recommended for the consideration of Pickering C' Counci ////(/' i �/ i 2 2_ot2, Tony Prevedel, P.Eng. Chief Administrative Officer •