1 Mississauga Transit (MT) Buses on Burnhamthorpe Road (Markland-Centennial - Ward 4)

2 Prince Edward (Bloor Street Viaduct) - Measures to Deter Suicide Attempts (Don River and Midtown -Wards 23 and 25

3 Realignment and Widening of the Pavements on Bathurst Street and Queens Quay West in connection with the Waterfront West Light Rail Transit Extension (Trinity-Niagara & Downtown - Wards 20 and 24)

4 Proposed Installation of Traffic Control Signals Warden Avenue in front of Centennial College and Warden Avenue Junior Public School (Scarborough Bluffs - Ward 13)

5 Proposed Installation of Traffic Control Signals Lawrence Avenue East and East Avenue/Rouge Hill GO Station Access (Scarborough Highland Creek - Ward 16)

6 Proposed Installation of Traffic Control Signals at Lawrence Avenue West and Glen Rush Boulevard/Welland Road (North York Centre South - Ward 9)

7 Proposed Installation of Traffic Control Signals Eastern Avenue, between Coxwell Avenue and Queen Street East (East Toronto - Ward 26)

8 Advertising on Bell Canada Telephone Booths

9 No Stopping Restriction Amendments: Sheppard Avenue, from Beecroft Road to Doris Avenue (North York Centre - Ward 10)

10 Dixon Road over Highway 27 Bridge Reconstruction and Associated Roadworks Contract No. T-28-99, Tender No. 3-1999 (Rexdale-Thistletown - Ward 5)

11 Prince Edward Viaduct Don Section-Span 3
Cleaning, Coating and Repair of Structural Steel, Contract No. T-25-99, Tender No. 4-1999 (Don River - Ward 25)

12 Dundas Street West, West of Lansdowne Avenue over CN Rail Structure Rehabilitation and TTC Track Allowance Contract No. T-8-99, Tender No. 8-1999 (Trinity-Niagara - Ward 20)

13 F.G. Gardiner Expressway-Concrete Substructure Repairs Sherbourne Street to Jarvis Street, Contract No. T-33-99, Tender No. 9-1999 (Downtown - Ward 24)

14 Contract No. T-33-98 - York Mills Road Bridge over Don River East of Don Mills Road, Structure Rehabilitation and Contract No. T-01-97 - Humber Bridges - Bridges 2 and 3 (Don Parkway - Ward 11)

15 Designation of Individuals for Approval of Traffic Control Signal Plans

16 Reimbursement of Registration Costs

17 Recommendations from the Toronto Pedestrian Committee Regarding the International Year of Older Persons (1999)

18 Procurement Authorization - Installation of Suspended Scaffolds for Replacement of Walkway Beams on the Prince Edward Viaduct (Don River - Ward 24)

19 510 Spadina: Effects of Proposed Traffic Changes on Adjacent Neighbourhood (Ward 24)

20 School Board Lands

21 Other Items Considered by the Committee

(City Council on April 13, 14 and 15, 1999, adopted this Clause, without amendment.)

The Urban Environment and Development Committee recommends that Council enact a by-law to prohibit Mississauga Transit buses from using Burnhamthorpe Road east of highway 427, and that the Minister of Transportation be requested to approve the passing of such a by-law.

The Committee reports, for the information of Council, having requested the Commissioner of Works and Emergency Services to report to the Urban Environment and Development Committee on turning the Dundas West High Occupancy Vehicle lanes into an exclusive bus lane with or without a rolled curb.

The Urban Environment and Development Committee submits the following report (December 4, 1998) from the General Secretary, Toronto Transit Commission:

At its meeting on Wednesday, December 2, 1998, the Commission had before them a report dated November 18, 1998 entitled, "Mississauga Transit (MT) Buses On Burnhamthorpe Road: Status Update."

Recommendations:

Recommending that:

(1) City Council, through the City of Toronto Urban Environment and Development Committee, be requested to enact a by-law to prohibit Mississauga Transit buses from using Burnhamthorpe Road east of Highway 427; and

(2) City Council, through the City of Toronto Urban Environment and Development Committee, consider turning the Dundas West High Occupancy Vehicle lanes into an exclusive bus lane with or without a rolled curb;

Background:

The Commission received the above report and referred it back to staff for update and inclusion of the following newspaper articles:

- Toronto Star, October 8, 1998;

- Toronto Star, November 26, 1998;

- Toronto Sun, November 28, 1998; and

- Toronto Star, November 29, 1998 (Royson James article).

The Commission also approved the following:

1. That platform leases continue on a month to month basis for those Mississauga Transit buses using Dundas and Bloor;

2. That staff take necessary measures to ensure that no Mississauga Transit buses which utilize Burnhamthorpe Road east of Highway 427 be permitted in any part of the Islington Station;

3. That Mississauga Council be advised that the TTC is prepared to enter into discussions with Mississauga Transit to resolve this matter and the Chair and Vice-Chair be appointed to meet to continue discussions with Mississauga Transit;

4. That staff do all things necessary to support the Chair and Vice-Chair in these discussions;

5. That the TTC request City of Toronto Council through the City of Toronto Urban Environment and Development Committee to enact a by-law to prohibit Mississauga Transit buses from using Burhamthorpe Road east of Highway 427;

6. That the TTC enlist the support of MPP Chris Stockwell in gaining the Minister of Transportation's approval of the by-law;

7. That staff bring forward a report on the enforcement aspect of the proposed by-law, including who will enforce it and related costs;

8. That the TTC request City of Toronto Council through the City of Toronto Urban Environment and Development Committee to consider turning the Dundas West HOV lanes into an exclusive bus lane with or without a rolled curb;

9. That staff bring forward a report on the possible integration of Mississauga Transit and TTC routes using Burnhamthorpe Road and Islington Station; and further that Mississauga Transit be requested to provide their comments in this regard;

10. That the TTC request comments from Mayor Lastman's Office with respect to this matter;

11. That Mayor McCallion be advised of the actions taken by the Commission at the meeting today, as well as, the Emergency Commission meeting held on Thursday, November 26, 1998.

The Commission also received communications concerning this matter from Mayor McCallion, City of Mississauga and the City Solicitor, City of Toronto.

The foregoing is forwarded to the City of Toronto Urban Environment and Development Committee for necessary action, as it relates to Item Nos. 5 and 8 noted above.

The Urban Environment and Development Committee also submits the following report (February 2, 1999) from the General Secretary, Toronto Transit Commission:

At its meeting on Wednesday, January 27, 1999, the Commission considered the attached report entitled, "Mississauga Transit Buses On Burnhamthorpe Road: Status Update No. 2."

The Commission received the above report for information, noting:

- As of December 1, 1998, Mississauga Transit moved the four routes which travel on Burnhamthorpe Road, east of Highway 427, out of Islington Station, and is picking up the passengers for these routes on Bloor Street, west of Islington Avenue;

- Transit Customers transferring from the TTC to the Mississauga Transit pick-up area on Bloor Street have been attempting to exit Islington Station illegally and unsafely via the bus driveway in order to avoid the longer, inconvenient walk around the block from the station entrance on Islington Avenue to the Bloor Street pick-up area. This is creating a potentially unsafe situation; other than this, no significant operating problems have been identified with the current operating arrangements;

- This inconvenient on-street transfer for transit customers will become more significant as the weather becomes colder, and will start to drive more of these customers away from the TTC and Mississauga Transit;

- Mississauga Transit has applied to the City of Toronto for permission to erect shelters on Bloor Street, at their pick-up area, to protect waiting customers as much as possible from inclement weather. Toronto Works and Emergency Services has stated that it is technically feasible to install such shelters on the sidewalk but has denied this request and, so, no shelters can been erected. These actions will further contribute to the loss of transit customers at a time when transit is struggling to hold its ground in the urban travel market;

- On December 1, 2, and 3, 1998, the Burnhamthorpe Residents for Traffic Safety conducted walking protests on a crosswalk located on Burnhamthorpe Road, east of The East Mall, to express their opposition to Mississauga Transit's continued use of Burnhamthorpe Road. These protests did not affect TTC bus service.

The foregoing is forwarded to the City of Toronto Urban Environment & Development Committee, City of Toronto Transportation Department, and the City of Mississauga for information.

The Urban Environment and Development Committee also submit the following communication (January 25, 1999) from the City Clerk, City of Mississauga:

This is to advise you that the enclosed Resolution 10-99 was passed by the Council of The Corporation of the City of Mississauga at its meeting on January 20, 1999, which I believe is self-explanatory.

Would you please bring this request to the attention of Toronto City Council as soon as possible and advise this office of Council's decision.

Whereas Resolution 356-98 passed by Council on November 25, 1998, requested that the Toronto Transit Commission (TTC) delay any action of curtailing Mississauga Transit use of the Islington Subway Station until April 30, 1999, in order to permit exploration of various alternatives;

And whereas the TTC at its meeting on December 2, 1998, approved the platform leases on a month to month basis for those Mississauga Transit buses using Dundas Street and Bloor Street, but instructed its staff "...to ensure that no Mississauga Transit buses which utilize Burnhamthorpe Road east of Highway 427 be permitted in any part of the Islington Station";

And whereas this action requires that Mississauga Transit passengers using the Burnhamthorpe Road service be picked up on Bloor Street;

And whereas by letter dated November 27, 1998, the Commissioner of transportation and Works requested permission to erect three bus shelters on the sidewalk on the north side of Bloor Street immediately west of Islington Avenue to accommodate these passengers;

And whereas by letter dated December 16, 1998, the Director of Transportation Services (District 2), City of Toronto, denied this request at this time given the current discussions;

And whereas the Council of The Corporation of the City of Mississauga desires to pursue this request;

Now therefore be it resolved that the Council of the City of Toronto be requested to approve the installation of three bus shelters on Bloor Street (immediately west of Islington Avenue).

The Urban Environment and Development Committee also had before it the following material, which was forwarded to all Members of Council with the agenda of the Urban Environment and Development Committee for its meeting of March 31, 1999, and copies thereof are on file in the office of the City Clerk:

- Report No. 9 (January 27, 1999) from the Toronto Transit Commission, appended to their communication dated February 2, 1999;

- communication (December 16, 1998) from the Commissioner of Works and Emergency Services, City of Toronto, addressed to the Commissioner of Transportation and Works, City of Mississauga; communication (December 4, 1998) from the Town of Caledon, addressed to the Mayor, City of Mississauga; communication (December 4, 1998) from the General Manager, Toronto Transit Commission, addressed to the Mayor, City of Mississauga; appended to the communication (January 25, 1999) from the City Clerk, City of Mississauga; and

- communication (March 3, 1999) from Rita Alldrit, Burnhamthorpe Residents for Traffic Safety.

The Committee also had before it a confidential report (March 16, 1999) from the City Solicitor which has been forwarded to Members of Council under separate cover, such report to remain confidential in accordance with the provisions of the Municipal Act.

The following persons appeared before the Urban Environment and Development Committee in connection with the foregoing matter:

- Rita Alldrit, obo Burnhamthorpe Residents for Traffic Safety;

- Councillor Lindsay Luby, Kingsway-Humber;

- Councillor Dick O'Brien, Markland-Centennial; and

- Councillor Mario Giansante, Kingway-Humber.

(City Council on April 13, 14 and 15, 1999, adopted this Clause, without amendment.)

The Committee recommends the adoption of Recommendations (3) and (4) of the report (March 18, 1999) from the Commissioner, Works and Emergency Services.

The Committee reports, for the information of Council, having deferred consideration of Recommendations (1) and (2) of the report (March 18, 1999) from the Commissioner, Works and Emergency Services and requested the Commissioner to report further to the Committee for consideration at its April 19, 1999 or May 17, 1999 meeting.

The Urban Environment and Development Committee submits the following report (March 18, 1999) from the Commissioner of Works and Emergency Services:

Purpose:

To provide a status report on the Prince Edward (Bloor Street) Viaduct - Measures to Deter Suicide Attempts project and to outline, through a series of recommendations, a proposed course of action that will allow the project to proceed to a satisfactory conclusion.

Recommendations:

It is recommended that:

1. subject to approval by the Toronto Transit Commission, Council authorize the additional expenditure of $800,000.00 for the purchase of a modified Bridgemaster vehicle to be included within the TTC's 2000 capital budget estimates, and that the vehicle be maintained, thereafter, in the TTC's ownership;

2. in view of the confirmation of Dereck Revington Studios/Yolles Partnership Inc. that it cannot complete the project within $1.5 million, the amount prescribed in the terms of reference for the design competition, Council authorize not proceeding with finalization of an agreement with Dereck Revington Studios/Yolles Partnership Inc. and, instead, authorize the engagement of E.R.A. Architect Inc. to prepare detailed design and tender documents for the construction of the Prince Edward Viaduct Suicide Deterrent Measures based on its design proposal with the prescribed funding amount, and on terms and conditions satisfactory to the Commissioner of Works and Emergency Services and the City Solicitor;

3. temporary measures be put in place without further delay, including six telephones and appropriate signage, and that the additional annual costs estimated to be $2,500.00 incurred by the Distress Centre, be accommodated through a slightly increased yearly grant to the Centre; and

4. the Schizophrenia Society working with community groups establish patrols on the bridge, the details of which would be reported to Council at a later date.

Background:

Subsequent to a design competition, Council at its meeting held on October lst and 2nd, 1998, approved Clause No. 1 of Report No. 11 of The Urban Environment and Development Committee authorizing the engagement of Dereck Revington Studios/Yolles Partnership Inc. to prepare the detailed design and tender documents for the construction of the Prince Edward Viaduct Suicide Deterrent Measures. The Terms of Reference for the design competition was very specific in establishing an upper limit for the costs at $1.5 million and those expenditures were authorized by Council for the completion of the project.

During the preliminary design stage, the TTC expressed concern that following the installation of the barrier, they would no longer be able to carry out periodic inspections of the subway support substructure of the viaduct using their current methodology, consisting of a vehicle with a long flexible arm and a bucket called the Bridgemaster, that reaches over the handrail and under the bridge.

It also became clear that the selected design (or any of the other designs submitted) would not easily lend itself to periodic dismantling in order to facilitate access by the Bridgemaster.

In order to resolve the impasse, City staff have been working closely with TTC staff and have examined various alternatives including:

- a modified inspection vehicle capable of reaching over the barrier (Bridgemaster with a longer arm);

- a track mounted inspection vehicle (Bridgemaster on a TTC work train);

- construction of permanent inspection platforms under the subway tracks; and

- Remote Access Technology involving the use of ropes, harnesses and video equipment.

Discussion on the TTC's Inspection Needs:

TTC staff have estimated the costs of the alternative inspection methods, both in terms of capital expenditures and yearly operating costs and have presented the following summary:

Capital Yearly Operating

Costs Costs

Options ($x1,000) ($x1,000)

1. Using the current method with $0 $ 56.5

no barrier in place

2. Permanent platforms under the $2,000.00 $ 42.2

subway tracks (5 arches)

3. Modified Bridgemaster with $ 800.00 $ 67.9

longer arm

4. Remote Access Technology $0 $150.0

using video equipment

5. Track Mounted Bridgemaster $ 800.00 $129.9

6. Temporary Swing Stages $0 $637.2

7. Permanent Platforms for 2 arches $1,600.00 $ 57.2

and bucket truck from Bayview and

the DVP

Option 1 is the current method used by the TTC in performing inspections since 1996 using the MTO Bridgemaster.

Option 2 assumes construction in 1999 and 2000 concurrently with the approved support beam replacement contract.

Option 3 will require a delivery time of two years, however, the TTC is currently awaiting quotations from other manufacturers.

Option 4 in the TTC's opinion, poses a safety risk on one hand, and insufficient control over inspections on the other and, therefore, has been rejected by them. City staff disagree. Remote access technology is a well accepted method of bridge inspections and was last used in Ontario by the Ministry of Transportation - Ontario for substructure inspections of the Garden City Skyway in the Niagara Region in 1998.

Option 5 allows for limited inspection windows of less than two hours a day.

Option 6 was the TTC's practice prior to 1996.

Option 7 is a combination of Option 2 above and the use of a "cherry picker" truck from the ground for part of the structure. This option would result in frequent road closures on both the Don Valley Parkway and the Bayview Extension.

TTC staff, having considered the implications of the alternatives, are prepared to recommend Option 3 in their report to the Commission.

Discussion on the City's Inspection Needs:

During a meeting held on March 9, 1999, involving the Chair of the UEDC and some of the area Councillors, City staff were requested to provide information, including costs involved in the inspection of the rest of the structure.

The deck of the Prince Edward Viaduct was last repaired in 1989. The recoating of the structural steel substructure followed shortly after. In April 1999, we expect City Council to award the last recoating contract for Span No. 3.

Since the rehabilitation contract, former Metro Transportation and now the City staff have performed regular routine inspections of this bridge. In general, inspection has been performed in accordance with the Structure Inspection Manual issued by the Ontario Ministry of Transportation. Staff have used different methods for inspection on different components. For example, staff would request special permission to enter into the TTC subway right-of-ways with the aid of flaggers to visually inspect the underside of the bridge deck. For the substructure, more detailed inspection has been performed in utilizing the falsework installed for the recoating contracts. Furthermore, visual inspection was also performed from the ground with the aid of binoculars.

When preparing the recoating contracts for Span No. 2 (the Don Valley Parkway span) and Span No. 5 (the Bayview Extension span) "man lifts" or a "cherry picker" bucket truck was used to inspect the steel work. For Spans Nos. 3 and 4 (the Don River span) an inspection engineer with safety harnesses climbed up the structural steel from ground. Steel cable lifelines were also installed to assist the inspection from a safety standpoint. This bridge is currently in good condition, therefore, inspection costs for the City only include staff time and the accessory cost is minimal.

Discussion on Cost Estimates provided by Dereck Revington Studios:

The Terms of Reference for the design competition specified the amount of $1.5 million as the maximum amount within which the project had to be completed. Dereck Revington Studios/Yolles Partnership Inc. won the competition based on those Terms of Reference and Council authorized the engagement of these companies at its meeting held on October lst and 2nd, 1998. In early March 1999, following some quantity estimates by City staff, Mr. Revington was requested to provide assurance, in writing, that the cost of the project would not exceed $1.5 million. In his response dated March 14,1999, he indicates that he can no longer stand by his original estimate and, in fact, the project will cost substantially more than specified in the Terms of Reference. His current estimate is $2.14 million.

City staff have approached E.R.A. Architect Inc., the runner-up in the design competition, and they have indicated in a letter dated March l7, 1999, that they stand behind their original estimates.

Under the circumstances, it would be appropriate for Council to withdraw its previous approval relating to the engagement of Dereck Revington Studios/Yolles Partnership Inc. and to instruct the Commissioner of Works and Emergency Services to enter into an agreement with E.R.A. Architect Inc. to prepare the detailed design and tender documents. The City Solicitor is in agreement with this recommendation.

Heritage Toronto, who played a key role in the selection of the successful design alternatives, are also in agreement with the recommendation.

Discussion on Temporary Measures:

If Council authorized commencement of the project at its upcoming meeting, it would be completed by the late fall of 1999 at the earliest. In the meantime, immediate short term measures should be considered. These measures include the installation of telephones and community patrols on the bridge. Both of these proposals were discussed by the Steering Committee during the preliminary design phase.

Telephones:

Dedicated telephone lines may prove useful for individuals in need of professional advice. Such telephone lines have been employed in other jurisdictions with a great degree of success. A total of six telephones would be connected directly to the Distress Centre where qualified personnel would deal with individual situations.

The following is the estimate of costs:

- Initial cost of installation $16,000

- Operating cost for telephone lines $ 2,700 per annum

- Additional costs incurred by the

Distress Centre: Initial $ 5,000

Operating $ 2,500 per annum

Patrols:

The patrols can either be from the police or from community groups such as the Schizophrenia Society. In view of the restraint on the police budget, it may be difficult to have their commitment. As for the community groups, this service would be provided on a voluntary basis. It is uncertain, at this time, what level of patrolling is necessary, thus an estimated cost cannot be made until the unknowns are realized.

Conclusion:

The project has suffered significant delays due to the need to accommodate the TTC's ongoing bridge inspection needs. It would now appear that the TTC requirements can be satisfied at an additional cost of $800,000.00. If Council agrees to the continued engagement of Dereck Revington Studios/Yolles Partnership Inc. at a cost which is $0.85 million higher than the original submission including contingencies, the project will proceed immediately upon approval and, barring further delays, it stands a good chance of being completed by the end of 1999. In the meantime, temporary measures in the form of telephones, signs and community patrols should be instituted without further delay.

Contact Name & Telephone No.

Mike Chung, P.Eng.

Manager, Structures & Expressways, Design Construction and Inspection

Technical Services Division

Tel. 392-8341

The Urban Environment and Development Committee also submits the following report (March 24, 1999) from the General Manager, Toronto Transit Commission:

At its meeting on Tuesday, March 23, 1999, the Commission considered the attached report entitled, "Prince Edward Viaduct - Suicide Barrier and TTC Structural Inspection Options."

The Commission approved the Recommendation contained in the above report, as listed below:

"It is recommended that the Commission approve:

1. Receipt of this report for information noting that:

- the proposed Prince Edward Viaduct suicide barrier prevents the TTC from using current methods for inspecting the portion of the bridge structure for which TTC is responsible;

- City staff are reluctant to consider an alternative barrier design which would accommodate TTC's inspection needs;

- as a result, it will be necessary to procure an inspection vehicle (estimated to cost $800,000) to allow our inspections to continue; and

- alternatively, a removable fence (see attached drawing #3) could be considered as a suicide barrier (estimated at $650,000)which would allow TTC's current cost effective inspections to continue.

2. Forwarding this report to City of Toronto Council to request City funding of the required larger inspection vehicle."

The foregoing is forwarded to the Urban Environment and Development Committee and City of Toronto Council for consideration of the Commission's request that funding for the design and procurement of the larger inspection vehicle be incorporated in the City of Toronto's Capital Program, as noted above.

The Urban Environment and Development Committee also had before it the following communications and copies thereof are on file in the office of the City Clerk:

- (March 24, 1999) from the General Secretary, Toronto Transit Commission forwarding their Report No. 22 to City of Toronto Council and requesting City funding for the required larger inspection vehicle.

- (March 16, 1999) from Alan L. Berman, Executive Director, American Association of Suicidology, supporting the effort to create anti-suicide barriers at the Bloor Viaduct.

- (February 12, 1999) from David Lester, Ph.D., Professor of Psychology, Past President of the International Association for Suicide Prevention, supporting the fencing in of the Bloor Street West Viaduct to prevent people jumping from it in an effort to commit suicide.

- (March 25, 1999) from Councillor Ila Bossons requesting the Provincial Government to provide financial assistance for the Bloor Viaduct suicide barrier.

- (March 29, 1999) from Dr. Chris Cantor, Senior Research Psychiatrist, Australian Institute for Suicide Research and Prevention, urging all interested parties to negotiate a solution which permits a very worthwhile suicide prevention project to proceed.

- (March 26, 1999) from Robin R. Richards, Head, Division of Orthopaedics, St. Michael's Hospital, informing the Committee of the number of patients who have fallen from the Bloor Viaduct and survived with usually massive disabling and permanent injuries.

- (March 26, 1999) from Geoffrey Thun, Dereck Revington Studio, forwarding three letters of recommendation regarding measures to deter suicide on the Bloor Street Viaduct.

- (February 12, 1999) from David Lester, Professor of Psychology, The Richard Stockton College of New Jersey, urging that fences be placed on the Bloor Viaduct.

- (March 16, 1999) from Alan L. Berman, Executive Director, American Association of Suicidology, supporting the effort to create anti-suicide barriers at the Bloor Viaduct.

- (March 26, 1999) from E.H. Zeidler, Zeidler Roberts Partnership/Architects, commenting on the intent of the Committee to employ the services of another architect.

- (March 29, 1999) from Dereck Revington, Dereck Revington Studio, forwarding documents relating to the Bloor Viaduct - Preventive Measures.

- (March 29, 1999) from Claude Prevost, Regie Regionale De La Sante Et Des Services Sociaux, confirming that the installation of a safety fence would be the most appropriate measure.

The following persons appeared before the Urban Environment and Development Committee in connection with the foregoing matter:

- Ellis Galea Kirkland, Juror, Bloor Viaduct Barrier Design Selection Committee, Urban Planning and Development Services, City of Toronto;

- Derek Revington, Derek Revington Studios;

- Morden Yolles, Yolles Engineering Inc.;

- Richard Vermeulen, Vermeulen Cost Consultants;

- Dr. Isaac Sakinofsky, Clarke Institute;

- J.A. (Al) Birney, Past President of East York Chapter and Bridge Committee Chairman, Schizophrenia Society of Ontario; and

- Michael McCamus, Bridge Committee Spokesperson, Schizophrenia Society of Ontario and Member of Bloor Viaduct Project Steering Committee.

(City Council on April 13, 14 and 15, 1999, had before it, during consideration of the foregoing Clause, a communication (February 12, 1999) from Dr. David Lester, Ph. D., Professor of Psychology, Past-President of the International Association for the Prevention of Suicide, The Richard Stockton College of New Jersey, in support of the installation of barriers on the Bloor Street Viaduct to deter suicide attempts.)

(City Council on April 13, 14 and 15, 1999, adopted this Clause, without amendment.)

The Urban Environment and Development Committee recommends the adoption of the reports (March 16, 1999) from the General Manager, Transportation Services and (March 24, 1999) from the General Manager, Toronto Transit Commission.

The Urban Environment and Development Committee submits the following report (March 16, 1999) from the General Manager, Transportation Services:

Purpose:

To authorize the realignment and widening of portions of the pavements on Queens Quay West and Bathurst Street to facilitate the construction of the Waterfront West LRT extension .

Funding Sources, Financial Implications and Impact Statement:

Funds to cover the cost of the pavement widenings and realignments including related adjustments to parks facilities and utilities will be borne by the Toronto Transit Commission, as will costs related to the streetcar line construction.

Recommendations:

1. That approval be given to widen and realign the pavements on Queens Quay West and Bathurst Street, described as follows:

a) "The widening and realignment of the pavement on the south side of Queens Quay West, from a width varying from 20.5 metres to 14.0 metres to a width varying from 20.5 metres to 22.0 metres (including track allowance) between Lower Portland Street and Bathurst Street as shown on the attached print of TTC Drawing No. R7-3-G-1A dated March 15, 1999"; and

b) "The widening and realignment of the pavement on both sides of Bathurst Street, from a width varying from 19.6 metres to 20 metres to a width varying from 20.0 to 23.0 metres (including track allowance) between Queens Quay West and a point approximately 120 metres north of Lake Shore Boulevard West as shown on the attached prints of TTC Drawing Nos. R7-3-G-1A and R7-3-G-1B dated March 15, 1999."

2. That the appropriate City Officials be requested to take whatever action is necessary to give effect thereto including the introduction in Council of any Bills that are required.

Comments:

The Waterfront West Light Rail Transit project westerly to Exhibition Place received Environmental Assessment (EA) approval from the Ministry of Environment and Energy in August 1995. The approved project contemplated the line on Queens Quay West to Lower Portland Street, then northerly to Lake Shore Boulevard West. TTC staff are securing an amendment to the EA approval to allow the line to extend westerly on Queens Quay West as far as Bathurst Street, before heading north to the existing tracks on Fleet Street. It is anticipated that a report from the Toronto Transit Commission on the amendment will be before your Committee at its March 31,1999 meeting and considered by City Council at its meeting scheduled for April 13, 14 and 15, 1999.

Construction of the extension is scheduled by the TTC to commence in the Spring of this year. The installation of the track bed involves a number of changes to the pavement alignments on portions of Queens Quay West and Bathurst Street and it is now in order to secure approval of the widenings as described in Recommendation No. (1) above to accommodate the transit work.

The widening of the pavements on Queens Quay West and Bathurst Street constitute alterations to a public highway pursuant to the provisions of the Municipal Act. This matter is being reported to your Committee at this time in order that the statutory requirements set out in the Act (advertising Council's intent to enact the by-law, public deputation hearing) can commence in the early Spring to permit final approval and construction commencement in accordance with the TTC's current schedule. Any required modifications or issues arising out of the detailed design or public consultation processes as well as associated changes to traffic and parking regulations can be reported to a subsequent meeting of the Toronto Community Council, Urban Environment and Development Committee or City Council, if required.

Contact Name and Telephone Number:

Mr. John Niedra, Manager

Infrastructure Assets Management and Programming

Transportation Services Division (392-5348)

The Urban Environment and Development Committee also submits the following report (March 24, 1999) from the General Secretary, Toronto Transit Commission:

At its meeting on Tuesday, March 23, 1999, the Commission considered the attached report entitled, "Queens Quay Streetcar Connection - Modification To Environmental Assessment."

Recommendations:

That the City of Toronto:

1) endorse the modification to the Environmental Assessment for the Queens Quay Streetcar Connection (originally prepared for the Waterfront West Light Rail Transit Line), to allow the construction of the streetcar connection via Queens Quay and Bathurst Street, as described in the attached report;

2) request that the Ministry of the Environment allow the modification to the Environmental Assessment for this project, as described in the attached report; and

3) request that the Ministry of the Environment allow a minor extension of Fort York Boulevard, between Fleet Street and Lake Shore Boulevard, in association with this modification, as described in the attached report;

Background:

The Commission approved the Recommendation contained in the above report, as listed below:

"It is recommended that the Commission:

1. Request the City of Toronto to:

a) endorse the modification to the Environmental Assessment for the Queens Quay Streetcar Connection (originally prepared for the Waterfront West Light Rail Transit Line), to allow the construction of the streetcar connection via Queens Quay and Bathurst Street, as described in the attached report;

b) request that the Ministry of the Environment allow the modification to the Environmental Assessment for this project, as described in the attached report;

c) request that the Ministry of the Environment allow a minor extension of Fort York Boulevard, between Fleet Street and Lake Shore Boulevard, in association with this modification, as described in the attached report;

2. Note that the modification to the Environmental Assessment for the Queens Quay Streetcar Connection is consistent with the alignment which:

a) has been documented in all TTC staff reports on this subject since January 1997;

b) is the best means of making transit service more convenient and attractive to the continually-growing Queens Quay, Bathurst Quay, Exhibition Place, Ontario Place, and Toronto City Centre Airport areas;

c) the Commission has approved during the review process;

d) has been presented to the public at all public and Commission meetings on this subject since January 1997;

e) is supported by the City of Toronto Transportation Services Division, and documentation to that effect, from the General Manager of Transportation Services, is attached;

f) is endorsed by the local City Councillors for the area through which the service will operate;

g) has been approved in principle by the Metro Toronto Planning and Transportation Committee and the Council of the City of Toronto during their previous reviews of the TTC reports on this project; and

3. Forward this report to the Urban Environment and Development Committee, Councillors Chow, Rae, Pantalone and Silva, and to the City of Toronto Transportation Services and Planning Divisions."

The foregoing is forwarded to the Urban Environment and Development Committee and City of Toronto Council for consideration of the Commission's request as it relates to Recommendation #1 noted above.

Recommendations:

It is recommended that the Commission:

1. Request the City of Toronto to:

a) endorse the modification to the Environmental Assessment for the Queens Quay Streetcar Connection (originally prepared for the Waterfront West Light Rail Transit line), to allow the construction of the streetcar connection via Queens Quay and Bathurst Street, as described in the attached report;

b) request that the Ministry of the Environment allow the modification to the Environmental Assessment for this project, as described in the attached report;

c) request that the Ministry of the Environment allow a minor extension of Fort York Boulevard, between Fleet Street and Lake Shore Boulevard, in association with this modification, as described in the attached report;

2. Note that the modification to the Environmental Assessment for the Queens Quay Streetcar Connection is consistent with the alignment which:

a) has been documented in all TTC staff reports on this subject since January 1997;

b) is the best means of making transit service more convenient and attractive to the continually-growing Queens Quay, Bathurst Quay, Exhibition Place, Ontario Place, and Toronto City Centre Airport areas;

c) the Commission has approved during the review process;

d) has been presented to the public at all public and Commission meetings on this subject since January 1997;

e) is supported by the City of Toronto Transportation Services Division, and documentation to that effect, from the General Manager of Transportation Services, is attached;

f) is endorsed by the local City councillors for the area through which the service will operate;

g) has been approved in principle by the Metro Toronto Planning and Transportation Committee and the Council of the City of Toronto during their previous reviews of the TTC reports on this project; and

3. Forward this report to the Urban Environment and Development Committee, Councillors Chow, Rae, Pantalone, and Silva, and to the City of Toronto Transportation Services and Planning Divisions.

Funding:

Sufficient funds for this project are included in the Queens Quay Streetcar Connection project budget, City Project No. 378, as set out on pages 631 to 636 in the TTC 1999-2003 Capital Program, as approved by the Council of the City of Toronto at its meeting of March 2, 1999.

Background:

At its meeting on June 24, 1997, in considering the report, Analysis of Costs and Benefits of a Streetcar Connection on Queens Quay, between Spadina Avenue and Bathurst Street, the Commission approved that "staff undertake all the necessary steps, as expeditiously as possible, to construct the streetcar connection on Queens Quay between Spadina Avenue and Bathurst Street using Alignment 2 [via Queens Quay and Bathurst Street]; and further that this line be built as economically as possible." Later, at its meeting of July 15, 1997, the Commission granted project approval for the streetcar connection. On July 29, 1997, the Planning and Transportation Committee of Metro Toronto approved the streetcar connection. Most recently, on March 2, 1999, as part of its approval of the TTC's 1998-2002 Capital Budget, the Council of the City of Toronto approved the construction and funding of the streetcar connection. These previous actions constitute approval, by the TTC and by the City of Toronto, of the construction and operation of the Queens Quay Streetcar Connection, on Queens Quay and Bathurst Street, between Lower Spadina Avenue and Fleet Street/Lake Shore Boulevard. The only remaining task, prior to final construction, is a modification to the Environmental Assessment for this project.

Discussion:

Part of the proposed alignment differs from the originally-approved Environmental Assessment (EA) for this project, which was originally prepared for the Waterfront West LRT (WWLRT) project in 1995. Before construction of the track on the revised alignment can begin, a modification to the EA, justifying the change in alignment, must be submitted to the Ministry of the Environment (MOE).

The purpose of this covering report and the attached detailed report is to officially document and convey the proposed EA modification to the MOE, and to request the MOE to allow this modification.

Background:

At its meeting on June 24, 1997, in considering the report, Analysis of Costs and Benefits of a Streetcar Connection on Queens Quay, between Spadina Avenue and Bathurst Street, the Commission approved that "staff undertake all the necessary steps, as expeditiously as possible, to construct the streetcar connection on Queens Quay between Spadina Avenue and Bathurst Street using Alignment 2 [via Queens Quay and Bathurst Street]; and further that this line be built as economically as possible." Later, at its meeting of July 15, 1997, the Commission granted project approval for the streetcar connection. On July 29, 1997, the Planning and Transportation Committee of Metro Toronto approved the streetcar connection. Most recently, on March 2, 1999, as part of its approval of the TTC's 1998-2002 Capital Budget, the Council of the City of Toronto approved the construction and funding of the streetcar connection.

These previous actions constitute approval, by the TTC and by the City of Toronto, of the construction and operation of the Queens Quay Streetcar Connection, on Queens Quay and Bathurst Street, between Lower Spadina Avenue and Fleet Street/Lake Shore Boulevard. Part of the proposed alignment differs from the originally-approved Environmental Assessment (EA) for this project, which was originally prepared for the Waterfront West LRT (WWLRT) project in 1995. Before construction of the track on the revised alignment can begin, a modification to the EA, justifying the change in alignment, must be allowed by the Ministry of the Environment (MOE). This report discusses and documents the need for the modification, the alternatives considered, the environmental effects, the consultation process which has taken place, and how concerns raised during consultation have been addressed. The main purpose of this report is to officially document and convey the proposed EA modification to the MOE, and to request the MOE to allow this modification.

Discussion:

1.0 A recap of the streetcar connection project

This streetcar connection is intended as a simple, no-frills extension to the existing streetcar network, by constructing approximately 850 metres of new double track on Queens Quay between Lower Spadina Avenue and Bathurst Street, and on Bathurst Street between Queens Quay and Fleet Street/Lake Shore Boulevard. Exhibit A (Drawing No. 11375), attached, shows this missing link in the streetcar network. This new track would connect with the existing streetcar network, and once the track is built, a new 509 Harbourfront streetcar route would be operated between Union Station and Exhibition Place, via Queens Quay, Bathurst Street, and Fleet Street. The new track would be built in the centre of the existing roadways, would be reserved for the use of transit vehicles only, and would be separated from the rest of the roadway by small landscaped medians and passenger platforms. The new streetcar route would replace the service to the area which is currently provided by the 121 Front-Esplanade bus route, and the 521 Exhibition East special-event streetcar route. Exhibit B (Drawing No. 11241), attached, shows the route network which would be operated when the streetcar connection is complete.

The project would be the initial phase of the Waterfront West LRT project, a project from the Let's Move/Rapid Transit Expansion Program of the early 1990s. An Environmental Assessment report was prepared for the WWLRT, and was approved by the Ministry of the Environment in August 1995. The present Queens Quay Streetcar Connection project is limited in scope to a connection between Spadina Avenue and Bathurst Street only, but is consistent with, and does not preclude, the eventual construction of the WWLRT. There are no plans at this time to construct that larger project.

Part of the routing of the Queens Quay Streetcar Connection, on Queens Quay between Lower Spadina Avenue and Portland Street, follows the recommended routing in the approved WWLRT EA. Construction began on this segment in October 1998, and no further approvals are required. The remainder of the recommended routing, on Queens Quay between Portland Street and Bathurst Street, and on Bathurst Street between Queens Quay and Lake Shore Boulevard/Fleet Street, is different than the routing in the originally-approved EA, which was via Queens Quay, Portland Street, and along a consolidated Lake Shore Boulevard and Fleet Street. Exhibit C (Drawing No. 11374), attached, shows an overall view of both the routing in the approved EA and of the now-recommended routing. Exhibit D (Drawing No. R7-3-G-1A and -1B), attached, is a detailed drawing of the recommended Queens Quay/Bathurst alignment, showing the track location, streetcar stop locations, and required roadway modifications.

2.0 Justification for the requested modification

The modification to the routing set out in the originally-approved EA is necessary in order to better serve transit customers, and to reduce the costs of building the streetcar connection.

The recommended routing via Queens Quay and Bathurst Street would better serve transit customers travelling to or from the Bathurst Street and Queens Quay area, including the Bathurst Quay residential area, the Waterfront Public School and Community Centre, the Toronto City Centre Airport, and other recreational and residential developments planned for the Queens Quay/Bathurst area. The recommended routing would bring transit service closer to these areas than the Portland/Lake Shore routing, and would have streetcar stops which would be more-conveniently located for transit customers.

The currently-proposed streetcar alignment along Queens Quay and Bathurst Street would be an integral part of the neighbourhood, would be more-visible to potential transit customers than the Portland/Lake Shore alignment, and would more-closely follow the main roads in the area, and thus better replicate the present travel patterns of people in the neighbourhood, whether they now travel by automobile, bus, bicycle, or as a pedestrian. The Portland/Lake Shore alignment would turn away from Queens Quay, Harbourfront, and the attraction of the lake, to operate in the shadows at the rear of buildings, and in the centre of Lake Shore Boulevard. By building the streetcar connection along Queens Quay and Bathurst, transit customers would be carried through the heart of the community, closer to the attractions in the neighbourhood. A prominent, visible presence for an important transit service is compatible with the city's goals for linking and drawing together the waterfront community, and to re-establish the importance of the city's waterfront.

The improved transit service to the neighbourhood as a result of the Queens Quay/Bathurst routing would result in higher ridership on the new streetcar service, compared to the Portland/Lake Shore routing. Many of the customer-trips which are projected to be made on the new streetcar line between Portland Street and Fleet Street are destined to or from the area west of Bathurst Street and south of Lake Shore Boulevard. These customer-trips would be better served by the Queens Quay/Bathurst routing, because of the proximity of the streetcar service. If the streetcar line were to be built on the Portland/Lake Shore routing, the service would be less-convenient and attractive, because of the longer walking distance to the nearest streetcar stops, and the disincentive to customers of having to walk to, and wait for, a streetcar in the middle of the heavily-travelled Lake Shore Boulevard.

The recommended Queens Quay/Bathurst routing would cost substantially less to construct than the Portland/Lake Shore routing. The estimated cost to the TTC of constructing the Bathurst/Queens Quay routing is 35 percent lower than the estimated cost of constructing the Portland/Lake Shore routing. The cost difference is principally because of the shorter distance of new track which needs to be built for the Queens Quay/Bathurst routing. The Portland/Lake Shore routing would include a realignment of existing tracks on Fleet Street for some 350 metres west of Bathurst Street, as a result of the required consolidation of the Fleet Street and Lake Shore Boulevard roadways. The WWLRT EA study recommended that roadway consolidation, which would further increase the cost of the Portland/Lake Shore alignment, in order to support the City's urban design objectives and to allow streetcars to satisfactorily operate from Portland Street to Fleet Street through the complex Bathurst/Fleet/Lake Shore intersection.

The budgeted amount for the Queens Quay Streetcar Connection project in the TTC's 1999-2003 Capital Budget includes sufficient funds to build only the lower-cost Queens Quay/Bathurst routing.

3.0 Alternatives to the requested modification

Two alternatives to the requested routing modification were considered:

1) Do nothing; do not introduce new streetcar service between Union Station and Exhibition Place, and continue service on the 121 Front-Esplanade bus route; or

2) Construct the streetcar connection on the originally-approved routing via Portland and Lake Shore.

The first alternative, to do nothing and continue the operation of the existing bus route, would provide fewer benefits for transit customers, and would attract fewer people to transit than if the streetcar connection were built. The present bus route provides slower and less-reliable service than would the new streetcar route. Travel time for customers over the route would be faster on the proposed streetcar route, compared to the existing bus route, largely because of the reserved right-of-way for streetcars. The streetcar service would also operate more reliably, because bus operation in mixed traffic is slower and subject to delays from auto and truck traffic, especially along the present bus route, which travels through some of the most-congested areas of downtown Toronto. Reductions in travel time, and increases in service reliability, have been consistently shown to increase transit ridership, and this would be the case in this area if this streetcar route is built.

In addition to the increase in customers because of the improvement in the speed and reliability of the service, more customers would use transit in the Queens Quay/Bathurst area if there were a new direct streetcar service, compared to an equivalent bus service. This ridership increase would occur because, all else being equal, customers prefer streetcars to buses. Streetcars offer a more-visible and permanent service, and one that is strongly woven into the fabric of the neighbourhood. Streetcar stops are more noticeable and identifiable than bus stops, thus giving public transit a more prominent place in the streetscape. This streetcar service would provide a better connection to the subway, with an easier, weather-protected, and prepaid transfer connection at Union Station, compared to the present outdoor on-street bus connection. Ridership increases have been seen before in this area as a result of the replacement of bus service with streetcar service, as in 1990 when the Harbourfront streetcar replaced the previous bus service, and in 1997, when the 510 Spadina streetcar replaced the 77 Spadina bus route on Spadina Avenue.

Because the do-nothing alternative would provide fewer benefits to transit customers and attract fewer new people to transit, it is not recommended.

The second alternative, to construct the new streetcar connection on the Portland/Lake Shore alignment, was discussed earlier in this report, in Section 2.0. This alternative would provide fewer benefits for transit customers than the recommended routing, because of the longer walk to the nearest streetcar stops, would attract fewer people to transit, would be less-visible, less-attractive, and less-convenient, would be more difficult and awkward to access, and would cost substantially more to construct. For these reasons, this alternative is not recommended.

4.0 Effects of the requested modification

In general terms, improving transit service has a beneficial environmental effect, through lower per-person energy use, and a reduction in automobile trips. A streetcar service is especially beneficial, because the vehicles emit no pollutants, and are generally quieter than vehicles powered with internal-combustion engines. The associated track and infrastructure, including the landscaped medians planned for this project, would add greenery in place of asphalt, would enhance the local streetscape, and would reduce the effective width of the roads, which would improve pedestrian access. Because the Queens Quay/Bathurst alignment would attract more customers to transit, and would serve a more-pedestrian-oriented area, than the Portland/Lake Shore route, the improvements it would make to the environment are greater.

Both alignment options, via Queens Quay/Bathurst and via Portland/Lake Shore, would be built through an urbanised, redeveloping, high-traffic area, within the right-of-way of existing roadways. The recommended alignment option, via Queens Quay/Bathurst, differs from the Portland/Lake Shore EA-approved alignment in the way in which the new streetcar service and infrastructure would affect other road users and nearby property owners.

TTC staff have worked closely with City of Toronto Transportation Services Division staff and traffic consultants to carefully analyse the effects that the Queens Quay/Bathurst streetcar alignment would have on motorists, pedestrians, cyclists, and other road users. A plan has been developed which would allow the streetcar service to operate along the Queens Quay/Bathurst alignment. With this plan, streetcars would operate satisfactorily through the Bathurst/Fleet/Lake Shore intersection. However, some of the current east-to-north left-turning motorists at this intersection would have to divert to other roads to make this turn. This reduction in turning capacity would be replaced when the City of Toronto constructs a nearby new road, Fort York Boulevard, from Bathurst Street to Lake Shore Boulevard. Staff from the City of Toronto Transportation Services Division support these conclusions, as noted in Exhibit E, attached.

The resolution of the Bathurst/Fleet/Lake Shore intersection issue, and the recommendation to proceed with the Bathurst/Queens Quay alignment, marks the satisfactory culmination of a major co-operative effort between TTC and City of Toronto staff. The previous WWLRT Environmental Assessment report recommended in favour of the Portland/Lake Shore alignment to support the City's urban design objectives, and because the Bathurst/Queens Quay streetcar alignment was judged to have unacceptably negative effects on other road users at the Bathurst/Fleet/Lake Shore intersection. However, the Portland/Lake Shore alignment was less-favourable to transit customers, and more-favourable to motorists. The recent reevaluation of the intersection design issues, and the resulting solutions to both transit and automotive capacity concerns, means that the new recommendation to proceed with the Bathurst/Queens Quay alignment is the best for transit customers, is acceptable to other road users, and can be built at the lowest possible cost.

4.1 Traffic effects Queens Quay/Bathurst alignment

The Queens Quay/Bathurst alignment would affect the operation of the Bathurst/Fleet/Lake Shore, Bathurst/Queens Quay, and Queens Quay/Portland intersections. The proposed streetcar alignment would eliminate the need for a new traffic signal on Lake Shore Boulevard at Portland Street, as would have been necessary with the Portland/Lake Shore alignment.

The consulting firm of Marshall Macklin Monaghan was retained to identify and evaluate design alternatives for the Bathurst/Fleet/Lake Shore intersection. An extensive analysis, based upon all future traffic volumes predicted for this area in the year 2011, resulted in the consensus design described below. Their report, entitled, Queens Quay Streetcar Project, Bathurst/Lake Shore/Fleet Traffic Assessment, is available on file at the TTC's General Secretary's office.

4.1.1 Bathurst/Fleet/Lake Shore intersection traffic effects

Streetcars on the new 509 Harbourfront route would travel through the intersection via a north-to-west left turn from Bathurst Street to Fleet Street, and an east-to-south right turn from Fleet Street to Bathurst Street. All other traffic is now, and would continue to be, prohibited from making either of these turns.

The consultants evaluated thirteen alternative designs for this intersection. The selected final design is illustrated in Exhibit D. Streetcar turns would be incorporated into the intersection by making the following modifications:

- 509 Harbourfront streetcars would proceed on an exclusive transit-only signal phase, similar to the signal phases for streetcars currently used on Queens Quay, east of Spadina Avenue;

- The number of east-to-north left turn lanes for motorists on Fleet Street at Bathurst would be reduced from two to one in order to provide one lane for streetcars and one lane for automobiles on the eastbound approach; and

- The number of southbound lanes on Bathurst Street, approaching the intersection, would increase from two to three, with one lane for left-turning automobiles, one lane for right-turning streetcars and through automobiles, and one lane for right-turning automobiles, instead of the current shared-lane arrangement between through and left-turning automobiles and right-turning streetcars.

The first two changes would result in the Bathurst/Fleet/Lake Shore intersection being unable to accommodate all of the morning peak east-to-north left-turning automobiles, both for opening day of the streetcar service and at the future scenario date, 2011. On opening day, approximately 300 of the 1200 automobiles which make this turn during the busiest hour of the morning peak period would have to use an alternative routing. By 2011, this would increase to over 500 automobiles in the morning peak hour which would have to use an alternative routing. This left-turning capacity issue is addressed in the following section of this report.

The technical evaluation included a variation on the selected final design which would maintain two eastbound left-turn lanes for motorists on Fleet Street, in addition to the streetcar lane, and would provide sufficient capacity to accommodate the present and future left turns from Fleet Street onto Bathurst Street. However, this would be more costly to build, would require three left-turn lanes from Fleet onto Bathurst, and would not be desirable in an area that is becoming much more pedestrian-oriented as a result of the extensive residential developments which are both planned and under construction.

4.1.2 Mitigation of capacity constraints at the Bathurst/Fleet/Lake Shore intersection

Additional left-turn capacity for eastbound motorists on Lake Shore Boulevard who now turn north on Bathurst Street from Fleet Street would be available when a new road, Fort York Boulevard, is constructed west of Bathurst Street, through to Lake Shore Boulevard. This proposed road is shown in Exhibit F. The first section of this new road, from Bathurst Street to Fleet Street, has been approved, subject to the necessary funding approvals. A 90-metre extension of this road, from Fleet Street to Lake Shore Boulevard, has been proposed by the City of Toronto. An Official Plan Amendment for this extension is now in process at the City of Toronto.

The Fort York Boulevard connection to Lake Shore Boulevard, when completed by the City, will provide the most-convenient alternative route for those east-to-north turning motorists who would no longer be accommodated at the Fleet/Bathurst intersection. Because the new roadway will eliminate the identified capacity reduction for left-turning motorists resulting from the construction of the streetcar connection, it is recommended that the Ministry of the Environment be requested to allow this minor extension of Fort York Boulevard, between Fleet Street and Lake Shore Boulevard, in association with the modification to the Environmental Assessment for the Queens Quay Streetcar Connection.

4.1.3 Bathurst/Queens Quay intersection traffic effects

The proposed 509 Harbourfront streetcar service would travel through this intersection via a south-to-east left turn from Bathurst Street to Queens Quay, and a west-to-north right turn from Queens Quay to Bathurst Street.

Streetcars would proceed during the existing southbound flashing advanced green phase. At those times when the signal cycle lengths are relatively long, a second signal opportunity would be given to streetcars during an exclusive transit-only signal phase. During peak periods, the transit-only phase would be provided between five and ten times per hour.

This intersection operates well below capacity today. The streetcar operation would result in minor delay increases to some motorists, when the transit-only phase is provided but, overall, would have negligible effects on this intersection.

4.1.4 Queens Quay/Portland intersection traffic effects

This intersection would be signalised as part of this initiative, as was also planned for the originally-approved streetcar alignment via Portland Street and Lake Shore Boulevard. Therefore, there would be no change to the operation of the intersection for motorists as a result of the construction of the Queens Quay/Bathurst alignment, compared to the Portland/Lake Shore alignment. The 509 Harbourfront streetcars would proceed east and west through the intersection during an exclusive transit-only phase, identical to those on Queens Quay east of Spadina Avenue.

4.2 Effects on cyclists

The current roadway configuration on Queens Quay from Portland Street to Bathurst Street includes eastbound and westbound bicycle lanes. These lanes would be retained in the new roadway design.

Southbound cyclists through the Bathurst/Fleet/Lake Shore intersection would be required to cross an additional set of streetcar tracks at a skewed angle. City of Toronto staff are considering various ways of designating the curb lane as a shared right-turn/bicycle lane to enable cyclists to cross the tracks at a better angle.

East-to-north left-turning cyclists from Fleet Street to Bathurst Street would be required to cross two sets of streetcar tracks at a skewed angle.

Cyclists travelling westbound or northbound through the Bathurst/Queens Quay intersection would be required to cross two sets of streetcar tracks at a skewed angle. This manoeuvre is similar to one currently required westbound at the Spadina/Queens Quay intersection.

At these locations, as elsewhere in the city, bicyclists would have to exercise extra caution when crossing the streetcar tracks, to avoid having their wheels getting stuck in the groove formed by the track.

4.3 Effects on pedestrians

Due to the road widening across the east leg of the Bathurst/Queens Quay intersection, the time that it takes a pedestrian to walk across the street would increase by five seconds at this location. However, pedestrians would be able to use the streetcar loading platform as a mid-point "refuge", if they wish to take more time to cross Queens Quay.

There would be no change for pedestrians as a result of the signalisation of the Queens Quay/Portland intersection, as this intersection would also have been signalised as part of the originally-approved Portland/Lake Shore streetcar alignment.

5.0 Capital costs

The TTC approved funding for the construction of the Queens Quay Streetcar Connection, as City Project No. 378, in the total estimated amount of $12.95 million. The estimate reflects a low-cost transit system based on a simplified track and right-of-way design which would meet the TTC's basic minimum requirements for quick, efficient streetcar operations along the line. The Council of the City of Toronto has also approved this capital expenditure, and recognise it as the most cost-effective design for this transit improvement.

6.0 Public consultation

The revised streetcar alignment was first discussed publicly at the Commission meeting on January 21, 1997, when the Commission considered the staff report, Opportunities for New Streetcar Routes, which identified the Queens Quay/Bathurst routing as a possible candidate for a no-frills Queens Quay streetcar connection. The Commission asked for further information on the Queens Quay/Bathurst routing, and at its meeting of April 1, 1997, the staff report, Time Required to Construct Streetcar Tracks on Queens Quay between Spadina Avenue and Bathurst Street was considered. As a result of that report, the Commission directed that an analysis of the costs and benefits of the streetcar connection be prepared, and that was presented to the Commission at its public meeting on June 24, 1997. The issue was further addressed at the Commission meeting on July 15, 1997. Public reports were prepared and presented at all four of these meetings, and members of the public were present. Further public consideration of the revised streetcar connection took place at the meeting of the Metro Toronto Planning and Transportation Committee on July 29, 1997. At the Planning and Transportation Committee meeting, members of the public spoke about their desire to see the originally-proposed landscape and streetscape design carried forward as part of the current project.

The streetcar connection project, and the revised alignment, have received coverage in the newspapers on a number of occasions, particularly after the initial Commission approval, in June, 1997, and after City of Toronto approval of the Capital Budget funding for the line, initially in April, 1998. The streetcar connection has also been mentioned in ward newsletters mailed to constituents by the councillors for the area.

In 1998, a further public consultation process was developed to obtain feedback regarding the revised alignment, and input into the design process. A public meeting was conducted in the Bathurst/Queens Quay neighbourhood on December 15, 1998, and was attended by approximately 40 people. Over 1500 notices were issued by several Canada Post postal walks to all residents and businesses in the area.

The public meeting was divided into two distinct parts. The first was an open-house format with staff from TTC and the local councillor's office available for discussion. The one-on-one contact allowed concerned citizens to get answers to specific questions they might have. The second part of the meeting was a presentation by TTC staff outlining the history of the project and the alignments which were considered in the approved WWLRT EA. The presentation also outlined the benefits and disadvantages of the Queens Quay/Bathurst and Portland/Lake Shore alignments. Comment sheets were available at the meeting for those in attendance to make written comments, and the comment sheets which were returned after the meeting are attached to this report. The main topics of discussion were:

- Design, alignment, and service details of the new streetcar service

- Effects of the streetcar relative to:

- Reduced traffic capacity along Queens Quay

- Access/egress to/from residential properties

- Pedestrian and child safety

- Noise and vibration

- General comments relating to ridership projections, the fixed link to the Toronto City Centre Airport, and design details of the streetcar line and roadway.

The majority of opinions expressed at the meeting were supportive of the revised alignment and the streetcar service in general. All of the written comments returned at the meeting (copies attached, in Appendix A) were in favour of the streetcar line. Opposing comments to the proposal, particularly about the perceived reduction in capacity for motorists, were stated by one attendee, and related follow-up correspondence on that issue, including responses to the concerns which were raised, are attached in Appendix A.

In addition to the public meeting, several presentations were made to various working committees and public agencies to provide them the opportunity to comment on the revised alignment and design details. TTC staff met with the principal of the Waterfront Public School, and with staff from the Toronto Harbour Commission (THC) and the Toronto City Centre Airport (TCCA). At the meeting between TTC and THC staff, it was determined that the streetcar connection and the airport fixed link project are compatible with each other, that there are no outstanding issues regarding the inter-relation of the two projects, and that the proximity of a direct streetcar connection to the downtown could be a significant attraction for airport travellers.

A record of all comments, minutes of meetings, and correspondence, including TTC responses to specific concerns, is included in Appendix A

7.0 Mitigation of noise and vibration effects

Noise from streetcar operations includes squeal resulting from wheel/rail contact, noise caused by streetcars operating over switches and crossings in the rail, and noise from streetcar acceleration, deceleration, idling and coasting.

An environmental noise and vibration assessment was conducted by S.S. Wilson Associates, Consulting Engineers, in October, 1998 to assess potential noise and vibration effects of streetcar operations in this area. The report, entitled, Vibration Assessment - Queens Quay Streetcar Connection, is available on file at the TTC's General Secretary's office. The assessment covered the part of the approved EA alignment from Lower Spadina Avenue to Portland Street, and the proposed revised alignment west of Portland Street, along Queens Quay to the Bathurst/Fleet/Lake Shore intersection. The assessment was carried out in accordance with the sound level criteria adopted in the approved MOE/TTC Protocol for Noise and Vibration Assessment for the proposed Waterfront West Light Rapid Transit Line.

The environmental noise and vibration assessment was filed with the MOE on October 26, 1998. Confirmation, dated November 9, 1998, was received from the Ministry stating that the assessment satisfied the requirements of the terms and conditions of the approval of the EA for the Queens Quay part of the Waterfront West LRT.

Based on the analysis of the environmental noise and vibration assessment, the study concluded that the overall acoustic energy due to streetcar operations in the Queens Quay/Bathurst area would be considerably lower than the existing ambient sound levels in that area. The assessment also reported that ground-borne vibration levels would be well within the recommended criteria.

Although the projected noise and vibration levels from this streetcar operation would be well within acceptable levels, the TTC would take the following noise and vibration attenuation measures to further reduce these effects:

- Continuous welded rail would be used, thereby eliminating noise due to streetcars passing over joints in the rail.

- Curved track sections would be designed with the maximum possible radii, to minimise wheel/rail squeal.

- Provision would be included for water lubrication systems to be used along curved track sections through intersections, to further reduce noise.

- The rails would be encased in a special rubber "boot", which will isolate the rail from the crossties and surrounding concrete. This rubber boot system would be used on all track sections except in the track switch areas, where it is not feasible due to the geometry of the track switches.

- Steel crossties would be used, embedded in concrete and isolated with neoprene bearing pads, to further reduce any ground-borne vibration.

These measures have been used successfully elsewhere by the TTC and have been found to significantly reduce noise and vibration. The rubber boot and steel crossties, in particular, result in significant reductions in ground-borne vibration levels, when compared to older track designs with wood crossties, jointed rail, and rock ballast.

8.0 Road widening

In order to accommodate a dedicated streetcar right-of-way in the centre of Queens Quay, it is necessary to widen the south side of Queens Quay, east of the Queens Quay/Bathurst intersection, by six metres. Minor road adjustments are also required at the Queens Quay/Bathurst intersection to maintain a bicycle lane, and to improve traffic flow through the intersection. Minor road re-alignment is required on the south leg of Bathurst Street to minimise the amount of curved track, and for the necessary lane configurations. An additional southbound lane is required on Bathurst Street, north of Lake Shore Boulevard, to allow the Bathurst/Fleet/Lake Shore intersection to operate efficiently, and to minimise delays to both automobiles and streetcars. This road widening was also recommended as part of the secondary plan for re-development of this area.

The road widening on Queens Quay would eliminate on-street parking on the south side of the road, adjacent to the school and community centre.

8.1 Streetscape mitigation

The TTC has retained a landscape architect to address streetscape issues along those sections of Queens Quay which are being widened. As a result of this process, compatible streetscape design and measures will be applied at any such affected areas.

9.0 Residential/commercial access

The dedicated streetcar right-of-way in the centre of Queens Quay and Bathurst Street would restrict access into, and exits from, driveways fronting on Queens Quay and Bathurst Street. The medians would allow only right-in and right-out movements. Approximately four driveways would be affected in this way.

Lane configurations at intersections along Queens Quay would allow for U-turns. The road network configuration in the immediate area allows for convenient right-in/right-out access to properties.

10.0 Approvals and construction schedule

Construction of the trackbed has commenced for the approved part of the alignment, between Lower Spadina Avenue and Portland Street. Construction of the balance of the revised alignment would commence immediately after MOE approval. The streetcar service is scheduled to open on July 23, 2000.

11.0 Conclusion

The Queens Quay Streetcar Connection recommended routing via Queens Quay and Bathurst Street is the routing which best serves transit customers and reduces construction costs. The recommended routing includes features which mitigate against negative effects for others. The discussion documented in this report is intended to provide the Ministry of the Environment with the information it needs in order to assess allowing a modification to the approved Environmental Assessment for the Waterfront West LRT.

The Urban Environment and Development Committee also had before it Exhibits A to F and Appendix A (Record of comments, minutes of meetings and correspondence) appended to Report No. 25 dated March 23, 1999 from the Toronto Transit Commission,which were forwarded to all Members of Council with the agenda of the Urban Environment and Development Committee for its meeting of March 31, 1999, and copies thereof are on file in the office of the City Clerk.

(City Council on April 13, 14 and 15, 1999, adopted this Clause, without amendment.)

The Urban Environment and Development Committee recommends the adoption of the following report (March 8, 1999) from the General Manager, Transportation Services and that authority be granted for the introduction of the necessary bill in Council to give effect thereto.

Purpose:

To obtain approval for the installation of mid-block pedestrian traffic control signals in front of Centennial College and Warden Avenue Junior Public School, coincident with the removal of the existing pedestrian crossover (PXO).

Funding Sources:

The funds associated with new traffic signal installations are contained in the Transportation Services Division's Capital Program under Project No. C-TR031. Total funding in this program is $1.6 million for 1999. The estimated cost of installing mid-block pedestrian traffic control signals on Warden Avenue in front of Centennial College and Warden Avenue Junior Public School is $65,000.00 including the removal of the existing pedestrian crossover.

Recommendations:

It is recommended that:

(1) mid-block pedestrian traffic control signals be approved on Warden Avenue in front of Centennial College and Warden Avenue Junior Public School;

(2) coincident with the traffic control signal installation, the existing pedestrian crossover be removed; and

(3) the appropriate by-law(s) be amended accordingly.

Background:

This location was investigated at the request of Councillors Brian Ashton and Gerry Altobello. Both Councillors requested that staff review the feasibility of replacing the PXO on Warden Avenue in front of Centennial College and Warden Avenue Junior Public School with mid-block pedestrian traffic control signals.

Discussion:

Warden Avenue in front of Centennial College and Warden Avenue Junior Public School is a four-lane arterial road with a two-way 24 hour traffic volume of 21,900 vehicles per day. Adjacent traffic control signals are located 410 metres to the north at Firvalley Court and 353 metres to the south at Danforth Road. Burnhill Road/Mack Avenue is located approximately 55 metres south of the existing PXO.

An eight hour traffic control signal warrant study was conducted and revealed that mid-block pedestrian traffic control signals are technically warranted. The results are listed below:

Warrant Compliance

(1) Minimum Vehicular Volume 17 per cent

(2) Delay to Cross Traffic 100 per cent

(3) Collision Hazard 7 per cent

Either Warrant 1 or Warrant 2 should be 100 per cent satisfied or any two of the three warrants should be 80 per cent satisfied to satisfy the minimum technical requirements for the installation of traffic control signals. The "Collision Hazard" warrant is based on the number of collisions that occurred at the intersection in a three-year period which were potentially preventable by the installation of traffic control signals. Collision statistics provided by the Toronto Police Service indicate one pedestrian collision over the three-year period from January 1, 1995 to December 31, 1997 that was potentially preventable by the installation of traffic control signals.

Based on the above information, the technical warrants for the installation of mid-block pedestrian activated traffic control signals are met.

Most of the pedestrian crossing demand in this area is generated by the two Toronto Transit Commission (T.T.C.) bus stops. The northbound bus stop is located on the east side of Warden Avenue, immediately north of the existing PXO, and the southbound bus stop is located on the west side of Warden Avenue near Burnhill Road/Mack Avenue. Most of the pedestrians who board and alight at the southbound bus stop are destined to/from Centennial College, and some cross Warden Avenue diagonally and do not utilize the adjacent PXO.

In view of this pedestrian crossing pattern, the T.T.C. will be relocating the existing southbound bus stop to a point immediately north of the existing PXO/proposed mid-block traffic control signals, across from the northbound bus stop. This will help to concentrate the pedestrian crossing demand in this area and will encourage pedestrians to utilize the pedestrian crossing device.

Warden Avenue is an arterial road, and the replacement of the existing PXO with mid-block pedestrian traffic control signals will not have a significant impact on the effectiveness of this arterial link within the network of arterial roads. Furthermore, the signals will enhance pedestrian safety at this location.

Staff have contacted the ward Councillors and both Councillors Altobello and Ashton have voiced support for the proposed installation of mid-block pedestrian traffic control signals at this location.

Conclusions:

Mid-block pedestrian activated traffic control signals are technically warranted and are recommended to replace the existing pedestrian crossover on Warden Avenue in front of Centennial College and Warden Avenue Junior Public School. The installation of mid-block pedestrian traffic control signals will enhance pedestrian safety in this area.

Contact Name and Telephone Number:

Peter K. Hillier, Manager

Traffic Operations, District 4

(416) 396-7148

(City Council on April 13, 14 and 15, 1999, adopted this Clause, without amendment.)

The Urban Environment and Development Committee recommends the adoption of the following report (March 3, 1999) from the General Manager, Transportation Services.

Purpose:

To obtain approval for the installation of traffic control signals at the intersection of Lawrence Avenue East and East Avenue/Rouge Hill GO Station Access.

Funding Sources:

The funds associated with new traffic control signal installations are contained in the Transportation Services Division's Capital Program under Project No. C-TR031. Total funding in this program is $1.6 million for 1999. The estimated cost of installing traffic control signals at the intersection of Lawrence Avenue East and East Avenue/Rouge Hill GO Station Access is $76,500.00.

Recommendation:

It is recommended that traffic control signals be approved at the intersection of Lawrence Avenue East and East Avenue/Rouge Hill GO Station Access.

Council Reference/Background History:

At the request of Councillor Moeser, Transportation Services staff investigated the intersection of Lawrence Avenue East and East Avenue/Rouge Hill GO Station Access to determine if a pedestrian crossing device could be provided.

Comments and/or Discussion and/or Justification:

Lawrence Avenue East, in the vicinity of East Avenue, is a minor arterial road with a speed limit of 60 km/h and a two-way 24 hour traffic volume of approximately 6,200. At East Avenue/Rouge Hill GO Station Access, there is an eastbound and a westbound left-turn lane. Adjacent traffic control signals are located on Lawrence Avenue East, 400 metres to the west at Port Union Road. GO Train commuter parking lots are located on both the north and south sides of Lawrence Avenue East. The driveway to the Rouge Hill GO Station on the south side of Lawrence Avenue East is directly in line with East Avenue, and provides access to the parking lot as well as a turning loop for picking-up and dropping-off passengers. To the east of this driveway, Toronto Transit Commission buses loop at an off-street facility immediately south of Lawrence Avenue East.

A pedestrian crossover (PXO) warrant study revealed a pedestrian crossing volume of 1413 in the peak eight hours of a normal weekday. Of these 1413 pedestrians, 216 were delayed more than ten seconds before they could complete their crossing. Based on this information, both the pedestrian volume and the pedestrian delay warrants for a PXO are 100 percent satisfied. Therefore, the installation of a PXO is technically warranted.

Staff evaluated this location for a potential PXO according to guidelines that were developed for the "Audit of Operational and Physical Suitability of Pedestrian Crossovers in Toronto". The Provincial standards and the comparative characteristics at this location are described in more detail below:

As described above this potential PXO site fails to meet four of the "environmental standards". Specifically, the operating speed (85th percentile) on Lawrence Avenue East is above 60 km/h, Lawrence Avenue East, is more than four lanes wide, the Rouge Hill Go Station driveway would be immediately adjacent to the PXO, and turning movements occur to and from the driveway and East Avenue. The collision records provided by the Toronto Police Service for the three year and five month period ending May 31, 1998 revealed that there were no pedestrian-related collisions during this period.

Given the failure to meet a four of the key "environmental standards", staff feel that traffic control signals would provide the best form of crossing control and are recommended for this location.

Staff have contacted the Ward Councillors and both Councillors Faubert and Moeser have voiced support for the proposed installation of the traffic control signals at this location.

Conclusions:

The installation of a PXO is warranted on Lawrence Avenue East and East Avenue/Rouge Hill GO Station access. However, because of the failure of this location to meet the "environment standards" for the installation of a PXO, traffic control signals will provide for a safer crossing environment and should be installed at this location.

Contact Name and Telephone Number:

Peter K. Hillier

Manager, Traffic Operations, District 4

(416) 396-7148

(City Council on April 13, 14 and 15, 1999, adopted this Clause, without amendment.)

The Urban Environment and Development Committee recommends the adoption of the following report (March 8, 1999) from the General Manager, Transportation Services.

Purpose:

To propose the installation of traffic control signals at the intersection of Lawrence Avenue West and Glen Rush Boulevard, removal of the existing pedestrian crossover (PXO) located to the immediate west of the intersection of Lawrence Avenue West and Welland Road, and geometric improvement to the southeast corner of the Lawrence Avenue West/Glen Rush Boulevard intersection.

Funding Sources:

The funds associated with the installation of the traffic control signals and removal of the PXO, estimated at a cost of $100,000.00 are contained in the Works and Emergency Services Capital Program under project No. C-TR031. Funding for intersection improvements required to accommodate this signal installation are estimated at $20,000.00, and are contained in the 1999 Current Estimates of District 3.

Recommendations:

It is recommended that:

(1) traffic control signals be installed at the intersection of Lawrence Avenue West and Glen Rush Boulevard;

(2) coincident with the traffic control signal installation, the existing pedestrian crossover be removed;

(3) intersection improvements be undertaken at the intersection of Lawrence Avenue West and Glen Rush Boulevard to reduce the radius on the southeast corner of the intersection and realign the existing sidewalks; and

(4) the appropriate by-law(s) be amended accordingly.

Background:

A review of the pedestrian crossing activities at the Lawrence Avenue West/Glen Rush Boulevard/Welland Road intersection was completed in early 1997 and it was determined at that time that this PXO had a satisfactory safety record, with one pedestrian-related collision in the previous five year period. However, the unusual geometry of this intersection was noted during a review of school related pedestrian crossing concerns brought forward by the adjacent community. The residents requested the installation of traffic control signals at the intersection of Bathurst Street and Coldstream Avenue and a general review of the local area with regards to improvements to help the local school children crossing the local arterial roads.

The further review of this PXO location determined that many drivers failed to yield to pedestrians in the PXO and that, despite the appropriate signs being installed to prohibit westbound left turns between 7:00 a.m. and 9:00 a.m., Monday to Friday, many illegal turns were completed. As a result, police enforcement of the traffic regulations was requested.

More recently, the local community has requested a review of the operation of this PXO which serves many schools, in light of the traffic fatality involving a local 15 year old female school student. The investigation is not complete but the setting sun is believed to have been a factor in the collision which occurred at approximately 5:30 p.m.

Comments:

Lawrence Avenue West, in this vicinity is a four lane arterial roadway with a speed limit of 50 km/h. Traffic control signals are located approximately 340 metres to the east of the PXO, at Ledbury Street, and 275 metres to the west, at Bathurst Street. This intersection is an off-set intersection with Glen Rush Boulevard running to the south of Lawrence Avenue West on an abrupt skew with stop sign controls. Welland Road runs to the north of Lawrence Avenue West and is stop controlled.

The most unusual feature of this PXO is that it is located in the middle of the off-set intersection and is therefore impacted negatively by heavy turning moments in the immediate area of the PXO.

There are approximately 270 pedestrians crossing Lawrence Avenue West at the PXO during an eight hour period of a typical weekday. During recent studies of this PXO, staff observed numerous occasions where motorists failed to yield the right-of-way to pedestrians crossing within the PXO. Furthermore, it was observed that vehicle queues sometimes extended through the PXO during the morning and afternoon peak periods. This created additional safety hazards for pedestrians because drivers could not see them as they crossed between stopped vehicles.

In addition, it was noted that there were frequent westbound left turns performed during the morning peak period despite the westbound left turn prohibition. During the afternoon peak period the westbound left turn movement caused westbound queueing which extended through the PXO.

The re-evaluation of the operational characteristics at this location has indicated that since the last review, there has been an increase of about 5,000 vehicles in the daily total vehicular traffic on Lawrence Avenue West to 34,000 vehicles per day. Generally, maximum roadway traffic volumes should not exceed 35,000 vehicles at PXO locations. It was also determined that the 85^th percentile operating speed on Lawrence Avenue West is 59 km/h. On roadways where operating speeds exceed 60 km/h, a PXO should not be considered as the potential risks to pedestrian safety increases. Finally, it was noted that the longer vehicular queues extending through the PXO create visibility restrictions, particularly as a result of increased illegal left turning vehicles during prohibited times.

It was further determined that the current roadway geometrics may be negatively impacting pedestrian and vehicle traffic operations as a result of the traffic conditions described above. Specifically, when travelling northbound on Glen Rush Boulevard, the radius on the southeast corner of the intersection with Lawrence Avenue West is expansive. Right turning motorists are required to look over their left shoulder to observe eastbound traffic, and this may be reducing their attention of pedestrian activities within the PXO.

Current records indicate that there were five personal injury accidents at the subject intersection from January 1, 1995 to October 18, 1998, one of which was pedestrian related. Collision data for the remainder of 1998 is not available.

The above indicates that the conditions at this PXO have changed sufficiently to warrant the installation of traffic signals. As a result of the unusual geometrics of this location, several options for the installation of traffic control signals are available.

(i) no modifications to the existing intersection geometry with traffic signal controls installed at the Lawrence Avenue West/Glen Rush Boulevard/Welland Road intersection;

(ii) modifications to the southeast corner of the Lawrence Avenue West/Glen Rush Boulevard intersection with traffic signal controls installed at the Lawrence Avenue West/Glen Rush Boulevard/Welland Road intersection; or

(iii) modifications to the southeast corner of the Lawrence Avenue West/Glen Rush Boulevard intersection, traffic signal controls installed at the Lawrence Avenue West/Glen Rush Boulevard intersection, and the Welland Road intersection with Lawrence Avenue West remain as stop controlled.

It has been determined that the most appropriate installation design is to provide for improvements to the southeast corner of the intersection of Lawrence Avenue West with Glen Rush Boulevard together with the installation of traffic control signals at this intersection. Welland Road at its intersection with Lawrence Avenue West, should remain as stop controlled. To further increase driver awareness and due to the location of the existing sidewalk on the east side of Glen Rush Boulevard, pedestrian crossings should be restricted to only the east side of the signalized intersection.

Conclusions:

The existing PXO on Lawrence Avenue West at Glen Rush Boulevard / Welland Road is no longer operating in a satisfactory fashion as a result of changing traffic conditions. Since the last review of this intersection in the fall of 1997, vehicular traffic has increased from 29,000 daily vehicles on Lawrence Avenue West to 34,000, just short of the maximum guideline of 35,000 daily vehicles for the installation of PXO's on arterial roads.

Longer westbound queues of left turning vehicles at Glen Rush Boulevard, which extend over the PXO's, are creating more difficult conditions for pedestrians as a higher proportion of drivers complete the left turn during prohibited times. Therefore, traffic control signals should be installed to improve the operational safety of this location.

Contact Name:

Roberto Stopnicki,

Director, Transportation Services - District 3

395-7480 (telephone)

395-7482 (facsimile)

(City Council on April 13, 14 and 15, 1999, had before it, during consideration of the foregoing Clause, a petition signed by 1,469 residents in support of the proposed installation of traffic control signals at Lawrence Avenue West and Glen Rush Boulevard/Welland Road.)

(City Council on April 13, 14 and 15, 1999, adopted this Clause, without amendment.)

The Urban Environment and Development Committee recommends the adoption of the following report (March 20, 1999) from the Commissioner, Works and Emergency Services:

Purpose:

To obtain the necessary approvals to install traffic control signals on Eastern Avenue, between Coxwell Avenue and Queen Street East, required to facilitate safe pedestrian crossing in conjunction with the construction of a new motion picture theatre complex as part of the Woodbine Park subdivision.

Funding Sources, Financial Implications and Impact Statement:

Funds to cover the cost of the traffic control signal installation, in the estimated amount of $85,000.00 are available under Transportation Services Capital Fund Code 296802.

Recommendations:

It is recommended that:

(1) traffic control signals be installed on Eastern Avenue, approximately 175 metres east of Coxwell Avenue at the driveway to 1661 Queen Street East; and

(2) the appropriate City Officials be requested to take whatever action is necessary to give effect thereto, including the introduction in Council of any Bills that are required.

Comments:

Eastern Avenue, between Coxwell Avenue and Queen Street East, is a four-lane roadway having a speed limit of 50km/h. A horizontal curve exists on Eastern Avenue approximately 125 metres south of Queen Street East.

Late last year, a motion picture theatre complex received site plan approval adjacent to the existing teletheatre on the south side of Queen Street East, east of the Eastern Avenue extension. The project is now under construction. Parking for these developments is located on the south side of the extension requiring pedestrians to cross this arterial street to access the facilities. As part of the site plan review, it was recognized that a protected pedestrian crossing at this point would be needed to facilitate safe access.

Adjacent traffic control signals are located on Eastern Avenue at Coxwell Avenue and at Queen Street East, approximately 175 metres to the west and 210 metres to the east, respectively. This spacing between controls is suitable with respect to the existing roadway geometry and traffic conditions in this vicinity. The theatre complex is expected to be completed in June, 1999. The traffic control signals would be installed in conjunction with the opening of the theatre. The signal installation is being undertaken as an element of the overall Eastern Avenue extension capital project.

Contact Name and Telephone Number:

Vince Suppa,

District 1, East Area, 397-5436

(City Council on April 13, 14 and 15, 1999, adopted this Clause, without amendment.)

The Urban Environment and Development Committee recommends the adoption of the report (March 5, 1999) from the General Manager, Transportation Services.

The Committee reports, for the information of Council, having requested the General Manager, Transportation Services to report further to the Committee on the status of the agreements with Bell Canada and the possibility of seeking Proposal Calls for telephones on City properties.

The Urban Environment and Development Committee submits the following report (March 5, 1999) from the General Manager, Transportation Services:

Purpose:

To advise that Bell Canada does not wish to renew expired agreements and does not wish to proceed further with the booth advertising program.

Financial Implications:

Subject to confirmation by the Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer, Bell Canada will remit payment of $196.26 to the City to complete its obligations under the expired agreements.

Recommendations:

It is recommended that the interim agreements between Bell Canada and the former City of Etobicoke and the former Borough of East York not be renewed and that the Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer confirm that all financial commitments of the agreements have been completed.

Background:

Prior to amalgamation, the former municipalities of Etobicoke and East York signed agreements with Bell Canada for telephone booth advertising. The proposed term was 10 years but in both cases the Financial Advisory Board only approved a one-year term to allow any other municipal agreements to be merged with these two at that point (December 31, 1998). The former City of Toronto rejected advertising on Bell Canada booths. At its meeting on February 9, 1998, City Council adopted Clause No. 5 of Report No. 1 of the Urban Environment and Development Committee which recommended that further expansion of Bell Canada Telephone booth advertising proposal for City arterial roads be deferred until the end of 1998 to provide the opportunity to assess the reaction to the installations in Etobicoke and East York in the context of advertising possibilities on the public road allowances.

Comments:

We are in receipt of correspondence from Bell Canada which indicates that Bell has re-evaluated the trial project and has decided that they do not wish to proceed further at this time. They have committed to immediately restore the booths that were retrofitted with the advertising panels to their previous condition. They will also remit to the City a payment of $196.26 which represents the City's share of the advertising revenue in accordance with the former Etobicoke and East York agreements.

Conclusions:

Bell Canada is not interested in pursuing telephone booth advertising at this time. The Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer should confirm that all financial commitments of the expired agreements have been completed.

Contact Name:

David C. Kaufman

General Manager, Transportation Services

Phone: (416) 392-8431

Fax: (416) 392-4426

(Councillor Giansante, at the meeting of City Council on April 13, 14 and 15, 1999, declared his interest in the foregoing Clause, in that his wife is an employee of Bell Canada.)

(City Council on April 13, 14 and 15, 1999, adopted this Clause, without amendment.)

The Urban Environment and Development Committee recommends the adoption of the following report (January 29, 1999) from the General Manager, Transportation Services and that authority be granted for the introduction of the necessary bill in Council to give effect thereto.

Purpose:

To install No Stopping at Any Time restrictions on the south side of Sheppard Avenue, from Beecroft Road to Doris Avenue.

Funding Sources:

All costs associated with the installation/removal of the restrictions will be the responsibility of the Toronto Transit Commission, as part of the Rapid Transit Expansion Program.

Recommendations:

It is recommended that:

(1) stopping be prohibited at anytime on the south side of Sheppard Avenue, from the easterly limit of Beecroft Road to the westerly limit of Doris Avenue, until the end of October 2001; and

(2) the appropriate by-law(s) be amended accordingly.

Background:

Staff of the Works and Emergency Services Department, Transportation Service - District 3, have reviewed a request from the Toronto Transit Commission (TTC) to amend the parking and stopping restrictions on Sheppard Avenue, for a period of approximately three (3) years.

The TTC, as part of the Rapid Transit Expansion Program, will be instituting traffic detours on both Sheppard Avenue and Yonge Street. Lane restrictions/reductions are included within the detour plans.

Discussion:

The installation of the restrictions is required to prevent the stopping of vehicles on Sheppard Avenue, between Beecroft Road and Doris Avenue, during the time of the detours.

Extensive consultation has taken place between staff of the Works and Emergency Services Department, the local Councillors, the Toronto Parking Authority and the TTC.

Conclusions:

The stopping amendments, as recommended, should be implemented to reduce the disruption to the flow of traffic on Sheppard Avenue and through the Sheppard Avenue/Yonge Street intersection, during construction of the Sheppard Subway.

Contact Name:

Allen Pinkerton, Manager, Traffic Operations

395-7463 (telephone)

395-7482 (facsimile)

ajpinker@city.north-york.on.ca (e-mail)

(City Council on April 13, 14 and 15, 1999, adopted this Clause, without amendment.)

The Urban Environment and Development Committee recommends the adoption of the following report (March 29, 1999) from the Manager, Fair Wage and Labour Trades Office:

Purpose:

The purpose of this report is to advise the Committee on whether or not the recommended contractor meets the requirements and conditions under the City's Fair Wage Policy.

Recommendations:

It is recommended that:

(1) Contract No. T-28-99, for the bridge reconstruction and associated roadworks on Dixon Road over Highway 27 not be awarded to Graham Bros. Construction Limited, Fairglen Excavating Limited, 795208 Ontario Limited, Graham Bros. Aggregates Limited and Graham Realty Inc.;

(2) no further penalties be imposed on Graham Bros. Construction Limited, Fairglen Excavating Limited, 795208 Ontario Limited, Graham Bros. Aggregates Limited and Graham Realty Inc. for not complying with the conditions under the City's Fair Wage Policy;

(3) Graham Bros. Construction Limited, Fairglen Excavating Limited, 795208 Ontario Limited, Graham Bros. Aggregates Limited and Graham Realty Inc. be eligible to bid on any future work issued by the City of Toronto; and

(4) subject to the approval of the Commissioner of Works and Emergency Services and the Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer, Contract No. T-28-99 be awarded to the next lowest bidder who meets the conditions under the Fair Wage Policy, Grascan Construction Ltd./Torbridge Construction Ltd., in the amount of $4,972,290.00.

Background:

All goods and services purchased by the City of Toronto is subject to Fair Wage Policy approval. The Fair Wage Policy document is included in the general conditions in all tenders, quotations, etc.

When construction services are involved, the following basic procedures are taken by our office:

a. The contractor is notified by us and the conditions under the Fair Wage Policy are discussed with them.

b. The contractor then sends our office a letter outlining their agreement to comply with the conditions under the Fair Wage Policy.

c. Throughout the duration of the contract, our office may visit the construction site to speak to their workers, or pay a visit to their head office to conduct a payroll audit for the contract they are performing.

If a contractor is found to be in contravention of the Fair Wage Policy, and the violation deals with workers' wages, the contractor must compensate their workers for monies owing. The contractor is then given a warning that if they are found to be in violation a second time, they may be removed from the bidders' list for a period of one year.

Comments:

The Bid Committee at its meeting held on February 17, 1999 opened tenders for Contract No. T-28-99, for the bridge reconstruction and associated roadworks on Dixon Road over Highway 27. The three lowest bidders were referred to the Fair Wage & Labour Trades Office for review and approval. The low recommended bidder for Contract No. T-28-99 was Graham Bros. Construction Limited.

My office was not able to determine whether or not Graham Bros. Construction Limited satisfied the requirements of the Fair Wage Policy prior to the report deadline to the Urban Environment and Development Committee meeting of March 31, 1999. Consequently, the report to your committee submitted by the Commissioner of Works and Emergency Services and the Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer made the awarding of this contract subject to a favourable report from the Manager, Fair Wage and Labour Trades Office.

During this time, our office received numerous calls alleging that Graham Bros. Construction Limited does not comply with the Fair Wage Policy.

In reviewing our files, we noted that Graham Bros. Construction Limited, were awarded only four (4) contracts under the Fair Wage Policy. These contracts were as follows: T-67-95 and T-42-96 for the former Municipality of Metropolitan Toronto, and Contract Nos. 96-4 and 96-5 for the former City of Etobicoke.

We contacted Graham Bros. Construction Limited and they provided the necessary documentation to review their payroll for the above contracts. It was ascertained that Graham Bros. Construction Limited did not pay their workers, engaged on the above contracts, the required wage packages under the Fair Wage Policy. The shortfall was an average of 8% per worker.

On March 24, 1999, our office met with officials from Graham Bros. Construction Limited. After a lengthy discussion, I am of the opinion that Graham Bros. Construction Limited will now take the necessary steps to comply with the Fair Wage Policy on any future tendered projects.

Conclusion:

Graham Bros. Construction Limited were found to be in violation of the City's Fair Wage Policy on all four projects performed in the former local municipalities. It is my opinion that if this matter was not brought to the attention of our office, Graham Bros. Construction Limited would be in violation of this contract (T-28-99) as well.

However, in view of the limited number of projects performed recently by Graham Bros. Construction Limited, as well as their willingness and commitment to now comply with the conditions under the Fair Wage Policy, they not be imposed any further penalties, but be allowed to bid for any future City work.

The Urban Environment and Development Committee also submits the following report (March 8, 1999) from the Commissioner of Works and Emergency Services and Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer:

Purpose:

The purpose of this report is to advise the results of the Tender issued for the bridge reconstruction and associated roadworks on Dixon Road over Highway 27 in accordance with specifications prepared by the Works and Emergency Services Department and to request authority to issue a contract to the recommended bidder, and to reduce the speed limit on Highway 27 in this area during construction.

Source of Funds:

Funding for this project has been approved by Council and is available in Works and Emergency Services Capital Account TRO55, Bridge Rehabilitation.

Recommendations:

It is recommended that:

(1) Contract No. T-28-99, for the bridge reconstruction and associated roadworks on Dixon Road over Highway 27 be awarded to Graham Bros. Construction Limited, Fairglen Excavating Limited, 795208 Ontario Limited, Graham Bros. Aggregates Limited and Graham Realty Inc. in the total amount of $5,182,266.75 including all taxes, charges, and $250,000.00 in contingencies, being the lowest tender received;

(2) commencing the first day of construction (expected to be April 18, 1999) and terminating on the last day of construction (expected to be October 29, 1999), the speed limit on Highway 27 be designated as 60 kilometres per hour at the following locations:

(a) Highway 27 (southbound) from Belfield Road to a point 500 metres south of Dixon Road;

(b) Highway 27 (northbound) from a point 500 metres south of Dixon Road to a point 350 metres north of Dixon Road;

(3) the appropriate by-law(s) be amended accordingly;

(4) the introduction of any necessary Bills be authorized; and

(5) the appropriate City of Toronto officials be directed to take the necessary action to give effect thereto.

Council Reference:

The Bid Committee at its meeting held on February 17, 1999 opened the following tenders for Contract No. T-28-99, for the bridge reconstruction and associated roadworks on Dixon Road over Highway 27:

Price Complete

Including All

Tenderer Charges and Taxes

Graham Bros. Construction Limited, Fairglen $4,932,266.75

Excavating Limited, 795208 Ontario Limited,

Graham Bros. Aggregates Limited and Graham Realty Inc.

Grascan Construction Ltd./Torbridge Construction Ltd. $4,972,290.00

Dufferin Construction Company, a division of St. Lawrence $4,973,432.76

Cement Inc.

G. Tari Limited $5,047,796.42

Pave-Al Limited & Orlando Corporation $5,091,797.72

Warren Bitulithic Limited $5,116,572.32 *

Fermar Paving Ltd., Fermar Crushing & Recycling Ltd., $5,166,391.17

Fermar Asphalt Limited

Dagmar Construction Inc. $5,218,850.24

Armbro Construction Limited $5,337,301.34 *

* Tender prices corrected for mathematical errors. Purchasing and Materials Management has verified that the mathematical errors are corrected.

Scope of Work:

This bridge is one of the structures transferred from the Province in 1997. The records obtained from the Province have shown that the deck and supporting concrete girders were badly deteriorated and needed to be completely rebuilt. In addition, a planning and functional design study was performed to determine the long term transportation needs of this facility. Contract T-28-99 has incorporated all recommendations from this study.

The rehabilitation work involves a complete replacement of the existing structure by a new bridge slightly south and east of its current location. The existing bridge deck carries three lanes of traffic in each direction and has a pavement width of 10.98 m on each side of the deck with no median separating the traffic. The proposed new bridge will have a 1.5 m wide raised centre median and will provide westbound and eastbound pavement widths of 11.0 m. Both approaches on Dixon Road will be rebuilt and re-aligned to the new bridge location. Highway 27 on the north and the south sides of Dixon Road will also be rebuilt and re-aligned in order to provide a 5.0 m vertical clearance under the bridge in accordance with the current Bridge Code.

It is expected that the construction activities will extend from April 18, 1999 to October 29, 1999. Throughout this period, there will be numerous stagings and lane restrictions within this section of Dixon Road as well as on Highway 27. In addition, the lane widths will be reduced and the lane configurations will be altered to create the necessary work zones. As such, a lowering of the speed limit to 60 kilometres per hour on Highway 27 is recommended to maintain safe traffic operations and a safe work zone during the construction period.

Comments:

The tender document submitted by the recommended bidder has been reviewed by the Commissioner of Works and Emergency Services, and was found to be in conformance with the tender requirements.

The award is subject to receipt of a favourable report from The Manager, Fair Wage and Labour Trades Office regarding working conditions and wages of the recommended contractor and his sub-contractors.

Conclusion:

This report requests authority to issue a contract for the bridge reconstruction and associated roadworks on Dixon Road over Highway 27 in accordance with specifications to Graham Bros. Construction Limited, Fairglen Excavating Limited, 795208 Ontario Limited, Graham Bros. Aggregates Limited and Graham Realty Inc. who submitted the lowest price bid for this Contract.

In order to maintain safe traffic operations and a safe work zone throughout the construction period, the speed limit should be reduced from 70 kilometres per hour to 60 kilometres per hour as set out in this report.

Contact Name and Telephone Number:

M. Chung, P. Eng., L. Pagano

Manager, Structures and Expressways Director

Metro Hall Office , Telephone: 392-8341 Purchasing & Materials Management

Telephone: 392-7312

The Urban Environment and Development Committee also had before it a communication (March 15, 1999) from Antonio Dionisio, Business Manager, Local 183, Labourer's International Union of North America, which was forwarded to all Members of Council with the agenda of the Urban Environment and Development Committee for its meeting of March 31, 1999, and a copy thereof is on file in the office of the City Clerk.

The following persons appeared before the Urban Environment and Development Committee in connection with the foregoing matter:

- Angelo Grassa, Grascan Construction Ltd.;

- George Rust-D'Eye, Weir and Foulds; and

- Vincent Brescia, Local 183, Labourer's International Union of North America

(City Council on April 13, 14 and 15, 1999, had before it, during consideration of the foregoing Clause, a communication (March 30, 1999) from Mr. Manuel A. Fine, Executive Director, The Heavy Construction Association of Toronto, respecting the award of Contract No. T-28-99 for the bridge reconstruction and associated roadworks on Dixon Road over Highway 27.)

(City Council on April 13, 14 and 15, 1999, adopted this Clause, without amendment.)

The Urban Environment and Development Committee recommends the adoption of the following joint report (March 8, 1999) from the Commissioner, Works and Emergency Services and the Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer:

Purpose:

The purpose of this report is to advise the results of the Tender issued for the cleaning, coating and repair of structural steel on the Prince Edward Viaduct Don Section-Span 3 in accordance with specifications as prepared by the Works and Emergency Services Department and to request authority to issue a contract to the recommended bidder.

Source of Funds:

Funding for this project has been approved by Council and is available in the Works and Emergency Services Capital Account TRO55, Bridge Rehabilitation. Approximately $900,000.00 is recoverable from the Toronto Transit Commission.

Recommendations:

It is recommended that:

(1) Contract No. T-25-99, for the cleaning, coating and repair of structural steel on the Prince Edward Viaduct Don Section-Span 3, be awarded to C. H. Heist Ltd. in the total amount of $2,961,966.22 including all taxes, charges, and $200,000.00 in contingencies, being the lowest tender received.

(2) the appropriate City of Toronto officials be directed to take the necessary action to give effect thereto.

Council Reference:

The Bid Committee at its meeting held on February 24, 1999 opened the following tenders for Contract No. T-25-99 for the cleaning, coating and repair of structural steel on the Prince Edward Viaduct Don Section-Span 3:

Price Complete

Including All

Tenderer Charges and Taxes

C. H. Heist Ltd. $2,761,966.22

Harrison Muir Inc. and H. M. Aquablast Limited $2,771,317.65

Clarke and Company Contractors Limited $3,269,142.91

Nor-lag Coatings Ltd. $3,691,154.39

The tender submitted by Clarke and Company Contractors Limited failed to include a price for Item No. 31 in the Form of Tender and is therefore considered to be incomplete.

Comments:

The tender document submitted by the recommended bidder has been reviewed by the Commissioner of Works and Emergency Services, and was found to be in conformance with the tender requirements.

The Manager, Fair Wage and Labour Trades Office has reported favourably on the firm recommended.

Conclusion:

This report requests authority to issue a contract for the cleaning, coating and repair of structural steel on the Prince Edward Viaduct Don Section-Span 3 in accordance with specifications to C. H. Heist Ltd. who submitted the lowest price bid for this Contract.

Contact Name and Telephone Number:

M. Chung, P. Eng., Lou Pagano

Manager, Structures and Expressways Director

Metro Hall Office, Telephone: 392-8341 Purchasing & Materials Management

Telephone: 392-7312

(City Council on April 13, 14 and 15, 1999, adopted this Clause, without amendment.)

The Urban Environment and Development Committee recommends the adoption of the following joint report (March 8, 1999) from the Commissioner, Works and Emergency Services and the Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer.

Purpose:

The purpose of this report is to advise the results of the Tender issued for the structural rehabilitation and TTC track allowance reconstruction on Dundas Street West, west of Lansdowne Avenue over CN Rail in accordance with specifications as prepared by the Works and Emergency Services Department and to request authority to issue a contract to the recommended bidder.

Source of Funds:

Funding for this project has been approved by Council and is available in the Works and Emergency Services Capital Account TRO55, Bridge Rehabilitation. Approximately $1.0 million is recoverable from the Toronto Transit Commission.

Recommendations:

It is recommended that:

(1) Contract No. T-8-99, for the structural rehabilitation and TTC track allowance reconstruction on Dundas Street West, west of Lansdowne Avenue over CN Rail, be awarded to Soncin Construction Corporation in the total amount of $2,725,638.26 including all taxes, charges, and $250,000.00 in contingencies, being the lowest tender received; and

(2) the appropriate City of Toronto officials be directed to take the necessary action to give effect thereto.

Council Reference:

The Bid Committee at its meeting held on February 24, 1999 opened the following tenders for Contract No. T-8-99 for the structural rehabilitation and TTC track allowance reconstruction on Dundas Street West west of Lansdowne Avenue over CN Rail:

Price Complete

Including All

Tenderer Charges and Taxes

Soncin Construction Corporation $2,475,638.26

Brennan Paving & Construction Limited $2,570,625.25 *

Grascan Construction Ltd., and Torbridge Construction Ltd. $2,628,890.00

G. Tari Limited $2,886,410.07

Dagmar Construction Inc. $2,927,121.14

Bridgecon Construction Ltd. and Bridgecon Holdings Ltd. $2,998,255.73

Dufferin Construction Co., a division of St. Lawrence $3,053,052.40 *

Cement Inc.

* Tender prices corrected for mathematical errors. Purchasing and Materials Management has verified that the mathematical errors are corrected.

Comments:

The tender document submitted by the recommended bidder has been reviewed by the Commissioner of Works and Emergency Services, and was found to be in conformance with the tender requirements.

The Manager, Fair Wage and Labour Trades Office has reported favourably on the firm recommended.

Conclusion:

This report requests authority to issue a contract for the structural rehabilitation and TTC track allowance reconstruction on Dundas Street West, west of Lansdowne Avenue over CN Rail, in accordance with specifications to Soncin Construction Corporation who submitted the lowest price bid for this Contract.

Contact Name and Telephone Number:

M. Chung, P. Eng., Lou Pagano

Manager, Structures and Expressways Director

Metro Hall Office Purchasing & Materials Management

Telephone: 392-8341 Telephone: 392-7312

(City Council on April 13, 14 and 15, 1999, adopted this Clause, without amendment.)

The Urban Environment and Development Committee recommends the adoption of the following joint report (March 8, 1999) from the Commissioner, Works and Emergency Services and the Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer.

Purpose:

The purpose of this report is to advise of the results of the Tender issued for the concrete substructure repairs on the F. G. Gardiner Expressway from Sherbourne Street to Jarvis Street in accordance with specifications prepared by the Works and Emergency Services Department, and to request authority to issue a contract to the recommended bidder.

Source of Funds:

Funding for this project has been approved by Council and is available in the Works and Emergency Services Capital Account TR180, F. G. Gardiner Expressway-Don Valley Parkway to Highway 427.

Recommendations:

It is recommended that:

(1) Contract No. T-33-99, for the concrete substructure repairs on the F. G. Gardiner Expressway from Sherbourne Street to Jarvis Street be awarded to Underground Services (1983) Ltd. in the total amount of $4,495,644.35 including all taxes, charges, and $400,000.00 in contingencies, being the lowest tender received; and

(2) the appropriate City of Toronto officials be directed to take the necessary action to give effect thereto.

Council Reference:

The Bid Committee at its meeting held on March 3, 1999 opened the following tenders for Contract No. T-33-99 for the concrete substructure repairs on the F. G. Gardiner Expressway Sherbourne Street to Jarvis Street:

Comments:

The tender document submitted by the recommended bidder has been reviewed by the Commissioner of Works and Emergency Services, and was found to be in conformance with the tender requirements.

The Manager, Fair Wage and Labour Trades Office has reported favourably on the firm recommended.

Conclusion:

This report requests authority to issue a contract for the concrete substructure repairs on the F. G. Gardiner Expressway from Sherbourne Street to Jarvis Street in accordance with specifications to Underground Services (1983) Ltd. who submitted the lowest price bid for this Contract.

Contact Name and Telephone Number:

M. Chung, P. Eng., Lou Pagano

Manager of Structures Director

Metro Hall Office Purchasing & Materials Management

Telephone: 392-8341 Telephone: 392-7312

(City Council on April 13, 14 and 15, 1999, adopted this Clause, without amendment.)

The Urban Environment and Development Committee recommends the adoption of the following report (March 15, 1999) from the Commissioner of Works and Emergency Services:

Purpose:

To obtain Council authority to increase the contract price of Contract No. T-33-98 for the necessary additional structural rehabilitation work on the York Mills Road Bridge over Don River, and also for Contract T-01-97 for the necessary additional work on the new Gardiner Expressway bridges over the Humber River.

Funding Source:

Funding for T-33-98 has previously been approved by Council and is available in Works and Emergency Services Capital Account C-TR055, Bridge Reconstruction Programme. Funding for Contract T-01-97 has been previously approved by Council and is available in Capital Account C-TR028 Replacement of Gardiner Humber Bridges. The Treasurer has previously certified that financing can be provided under the updated Debt and Financial Obligation limit and that it falls within corporate debt guidelines.

Recommendations:

It is recommended that:

(1) the contract price for Contract No. T-33-98, Structure Rehabilitation on York Mills Road Bridge over Don River, be increased by $59,543.87 to a total of $952,885.25 (GST inclusive) to cover the costs incurred for work done under this Contract including additional repair work; and

(2) the contract price for Contract T-01-97 be increased by $1,788,558.50 to a total of $37,559,728.50 (GST inclusive) to accommodate additional expenditures.

Background:

At its meeting on May 20, 1998, the Bid Committee approved (Bid Committee Meeting No. 5, Clause 28) the award of Contract No. T-33-98 to Bridgecon Construction Ltd. and Bridgecon Holdings Ltd. at a contract price of $893,341.38 (GST inclusive). In accordance with Metro Council Procedure By-law No. 129-94, the Planning and Transportation Committee at its September 3, 1997 meeting authorized the award of Contract T-01-97 to Peter Kiewit Sons Co. Ltd. in the amount of $35,771,170.00 including GST. Expenditures under these Contracts exceed their limits due to the additional work done.

On Contract T-33-98, the structure was in worse condition than originally anticipated and therefore the repair quantities increased. Also, additional work had to be done to rectify unforeseen site conditions. For example, additional steel repairs were required to the supporting deck girders. These girder repairs could only be identified and repaired cost effectively during the contract while the ballast wall and expansion joint were removed as part of the Contract.

Since the start of Contract T-01-97 in September of 1997, conditions were identified requiring the performance of extra work and additional expenditures by the Contractor, Peter Kiewit Sons Co. Ltd. For example, as approved by Council, to accelerate the construction schedule, a bonus of $10,000.00 per day was offered for each day that the Contractor bettered their schedule. Completion was 25 days early and therefore an additional expenditure of $250,000.00 was incurred. In addition, design changes were initiated by the project team to improve the final product, and these changes had to be done by Peter Kiewit Sons Co. Ltd. for continuity, warranty, liability and safety reasons. Also, unforseen site and foundation conditions arose that required the Contractor to perform extra work to fulfill the intent of the work programme as originally contained in the contract. Contract finalization has not occurred yet as discussions with the Contractor are still ongoing in an attempt to resolve the value of some outstanding extra work items. As such we are recommending that an allowance of 5% of the original contract value, or $1,788,558.50, over and above the original contract value be set for all extra expenditures under this Contract.

At the time that these Contracts were prepared, the Commissioner of the Department had the authority to approve additional expenditures on a commitment up to an amount equal to ten percent of the contract price in accordance with the former Metro Financial By-law No.146-90, as amended. As such, under the former Metro By-law, a further ten percent of the awarded contract amount or approximately $89,300.00 for Contract T -33-99, and $3,577,117.00 for T-01-97 existed for extra work provided sufficient funds in the Accounts existed to cover the shortfall.

At its meeting on January 6, 1998, City Council enacted By-law No. 7-1998, Interim Financial Control By-law, which repealed the former By-law No. 146-90. As the new By-law contains no provision to exceed the awarded contract amount, the Department has effectively lost its ability to authorize the unforeseen and necessary additional work that may arise during construction of capital projects. This is even more problematic for rehabilitation projects and foundation work. Typically, in this type of work the existing conditions are difficult to determine and as a result the quantity of repairs may increase significantly or the scope of the foundation work may change from what was originally allowed for in the Contract.

Condition surveys on all structures are performed in accordance with the Structure Rehabilitation Manual issued by the Ontario Ministry of Transportation and these are used to establish the scope of work to be covered in the contract. Surveys include, core extractions from the deck for testing and exposure of different areas of deck for examination. However, during construction, it is not unusual to discover that the deterioration is more extensive than originally indicated. For foundation work even though borings will be taken during the pre-engineering phase to assist in the foundation design, the soil and rock conditions during construction may vary. Also, only a limited number of borings are taken and therefore the results are not totally representative of the actual conditions. During construction of the foundations, the design assumptions have to be checked and the site conditions verified continuously, and the foundation design enhanced or modified as required.

Conclusion:

The contract price for Contract No. T-33-98 be increased by $59,543.87 to a total of $952,885.25 (GST inclusive) to cover the extra costs for additional work done, and Contract No. T-01-97 be increased by $1,788,558.50 to a total of $37,559,728.50 (GST inclusive) for additional work.

Contact Name and Telephone Number:

M. Chung, P. Eng., Manager of Structures, Metro Hall Office

Telephone: 392-8341

(City Council on April 13, 14 and 15, 1999, adopted this Clause, without amendment.)

The Urban Environment and Development Committee recommends the adoption of the following report (March 12, 1999) from the General Manager, Transportation Services:

Purpose:

This report requests that the authority to approve traffic control signal plans and modifications thereto be delegated to certain staff members of the City of Toronto Works and Emergency Services Department.

Financial Implications:

There are no financial implications to this approval.

Recommendations:

It is recommended that:

(1) Council designate staff members of the City of Toronto works and Emergency Services Department holding the position of:

Commissioner

General Manager, Transportation Services

Director, Transportation Systems

District Director, Transportation Services

Manager, Traffic Operations, Transportation Services

Manager, Electrical and Lighting Systems

Supervisor, Traffic Signals

as persons authorized to approve traffic control signals and traffic control signal systems pursuant to Section 144(31) of the Ontario Highway Traffic Act;

(2) the above authority shall be deemed to have come into force March 1, 1999; and

(3) the appropriate City of Toronto Officials be authorized to take the necessary action to give effect thereto, including the introduction of the necessary Bill in Council.

Background:

Subsection 144(31) of the Ontario Highway Traffic Act (HTA), concerning the installation of traffic control signals and signal systems, formerly required that Municipalities obtain approval from the Ministry of Transportation of Ontario for traffic control signal installations and modifications. This subsection was repealed and the following substituted therefor:

(31) Subject to subsection (31.1), no traffic control signal system or traffic control signal used in conjunction with a traffic control signal system shall be erected or installed except in accordance with an approval obtained from a person designated to give such approvals by the municipality or other authority that has jurisdiction over the highway or the intersection.

(31.1) No traffic control signal system or traffic control signal used in conjunction with a traffic control signal system shall be erected or installed on a highway designated as a connecting link under subsection 21(1) of the Public Transportation and Highway Improvement Act except in accordance with an approval obtained from the Minister or an official of the Ministry authorized by the Minister to grant such approval.

The above amendments were passed under Bill 92 (The Road Safety Act (No. 2)) and were effective March 3, 1997.

At that time, Metropolitan Toronto Council adopted a report dated June 27, 1997 from the Commissioner of Transportation designating staff members of the Metropolitan Toronto Transportation Department as persons authorized to approve traffic control signals.

It would now be appropriate to change those designations to reflect the District Operations of Transportation Services within the Works and Emergency Services Department.

Discussion:

As a result of the aforementioned amendments to the HTA, effective March 3, 1997, the City of Toronto is no longer required to submit traffic control signal plans to the Ministry of Transportation for approval. (The exception to this change is that all traffic control signal systems that are to be installed on "connecting links", e.g., ramps to Provincial highways will still require approval by the Ministry of Transportation prior to installation.) However, the City of Toronto is now responsible for designating a person or persons to review and approve traffic control signal plans, and to ensure that such plans meet the legal requirements as identified in Regulation 626 of the HTA.

Conclusion:

Delegating the authority to approve traffic control signal plans and modifications thereto to the above-mentioned staff of the Works and Emergency Services Department will permit qualified staff to approve traffic control signal installations on behalf of the City of Toronto.

Contact Name and Telephone Number:

Les Kelman, Director, Transportation Systems

(416) 392-5372 Telephone

(416) 392-4940 Fax

(City Council on April 13, 14 and 15, 1999, adopted this Clause, without amendment.)

The Urban Environment and Development Committee recommends the adoption of the following report (February 22, 1999) from the City Solicitor:

Purpose:

To obtain Council authority to require payment of all costs relating to registration of legal documents in the Land Registry and Land Titles Offices in connection with planning applications.

Funding Sources, Financial Implications and Impact Statement:

Not applicable

Recommendations:

That the City Solicitor be authorized to require applicants to pay for all costs relating to the registration of legal documents in the Land Registry and Land Titles Offices in connection with planning applications.

Council Reference/Background/History:

The various agreements related to development currently in use throughout the City require that the Owner pay for all costs relating to the registration on title of the development agreement and other conveyances or transfers of easement to the City including postponements and discharges.

There are situations relating to development where no agreement is required. In the case of a Part Lot Control Exemption application for example, there is no agreement entered into between the owner and the City. The by-law is enacted by Council and must be registered on title to the lands exempted. In such case, it would be appropriate that the by-law or other legal document not be registered until the owner has paid the registration costs of the documents including any subsearches which may be required.

The approval of this report by Council would assist the Legal Division in ensuring that these costs are properly paid by the owner who benefits from the registration of the by-law or other legal document.

Contact Name:

Anna Kinastowski

Director of Planning and Administrative Tribunal Law

(416) 392-0080; (416) 392-0530 (fax); akinasto@toronto.ca

(City Council on April 13, 14 and 15, 1999, adopted this Clause, without amendment.)

The Urban Environment and Development Committee recommends that Recommendations (2) and (3) of the Toronto Pedestrian Committee, contained in the report (March 4, 1999) from the City Clerk, be adopted and that Recommendation (1) be referred to the Commissioner, Works and Emergency Services for review.

The Urban Environment and Development Committee submits the following report (March 4, 1999) from the City Clerk:

The Toronto Pedestrian Committee, at its meeting of February 18, 1999 referred the following recommendations to the Urban Environment and Development Committee for approval, in recognition of the International Year of Older Persons:

Recommendations:

That the City of Toronto mark the International Year of Older Persons by giving priority to increasing the safety and comfort of senior pedestrians as follows:

(1) adjust signal light timings across the City to reflect the slower walking pace of older pedestrians. A minimum crossing time calculated at a walking speed of 1 metre per second plus five seconds start time is recommended, with more time allowed, where necessary. This is in line with provincial guidelines.

Note: Crossing times can also be reduced by squaring corners at intersections. Also, if right-hand turns on red lights were forbidden, pedestrians could begin crossing immediately on a green light or walk signal, giving them additional time. Similarly, well-designed pedestrian islands on major arteries with their own pedestrian signals could increase pedestrian comfort and safety without unduly slowing vehicular flow;

(2) standardize the installation and operation of all pedestrian signals to eliminate confusion. Many older persons have impaired vision.

Note: Standardization would eliminate much confusion. It is particularly important for visually impaired pedestrians. The installation of audible signals should be accelerated. The Task Force on Seniors has additional recommendations on clear signage;

(3) make sidewalk safety a priority across the City. This includes design standards, surface maintenance, freedom from obstructions, preventing and stopping all inappropriate use of sidewalks.

Note: Uneven and cracked sidewalks have been recognized as a major cause of falls for seniors. Obstructions and inappropriate use of sidewalks are common. Curbs and driveways are not well marked. Driveway ramps are often too steep.

Background:

Recommendations of a Former Metro Study:

The former Metro study on the Impacts of an Aging Population on Metropolitan Toronto Transportation, in February 1997, recommended:

- traffic light designs should consider the needs of older citizens who report difficulties in seeing and understanding existing signals;

- the policy allowing for right hand turns on red light after stopping should be reviewed considering its impact on older pedestrians;

- the timing of traffic lights should take into account the slower walking pace of older pedestrians;

- where such accommodation of older needs is not feasible, pedestrian islands should be considered, particularly in wide thoroughfares;

- installation of audible signals should be considered where possible;

- standards should be developed to ensure installation of a more visible curb edging.

Metro did not have responsibility for sidewalks, so these were not addressed.

The Toronto Reality - Crossing Time

Timing of signals is generally sequenced for the benefit of motor traffic. For example, at the intersection of a main road eight lanes wide and a secondary road four lanes wide the lights will be set to allow more green time for vehicles on the main road than the time allowed for vehicles on the secondary road. Depending on traffic flow, this timing ratio may be 2:2, 3:1, 4:1 or even more. The paradox for the pedestrian is that they need the reverse ratio; i.e.: twice the time to cross the main road.

A November 1998 staff report to the Pedestrian Committee on times for crossing University Avenue between Richmond Street West and College Street, reports crossing speeds ranging from a low of 1.59 metres per second at College Street to a high of 2.17 metres per second at Elm Street. Yet according to the Ontario guidelines, average walking speed is considered to be between 1 and 1.25 metres per second. The Ministry also recommends an additional five seconds starting time which is not provided in Toronto.

Clearly, there is room for a re-thinking of priorities away from the convenience of motorists towards increased safety for pedestrians.

Linkage to Right-hand Turns on Red Light

A pamphlet produced by Sunnybrook Health Science Centre, in co-operation with Metropolitan Police and Ambulance Services, recommends that seniors should cross at the beginning of a green light, and cross when cars have come to a complete stop. The reminder to cross at the beginning of a green light reflects the fact that, only then, if then, will seniors have enough time to cross. But, by watching the green light, seniors may not see vehicles, they may not have enough time to cross. But, by watching the green light, seniors may not see vehicles turning right on the red light. If they wait to check for turning vehicles, they may not have enough time to cross safely. Double jeopardy.

Need for Standards for Pedestrian Signals

At some intersections, there are Walk --Don't Walk symbols; at some intersections, there are none. At some intersections, there are eight walk symbols; at some there are four. At some intersections, there are 'helping hands', at some there are none. Pedestrian buttons may or may not exist. Where they do exist, they are not installed consistently. In some cases, the face of the pedestrian button is parallel to the pedestrian crossing; in some cases at 90 degrees, while in other cases at 45. In some cases, there is a combination of all of these variations at the one intersection. This is of particular concern to blind pedestrians who use the alignment of the button to guide their direction while crossing the road. At one location, the buttons for N-S and E-W directions were installed on the same post -- worse, these buttons were for audible signals.

Sidewalk Problems

Parked cars, speeding bicycles, jutting metals signs and other obstructions, narrow width, uneven surfaces, driveway slopes on sidewalks, lack of sidewalk continuity all pose unacceptable hazards to pedestrians.

(City Council on April 13, 14 and 15, 1999, adopted this Clause, without amendment.)

The Urban Environment and Development Committee recommends the adoption of the following report (February 26, 1999) from the General Secretary, Toronto Transit Commission:

Recommendation:

Requesting approval for weekend closures to road traffic on the Don Valley Parkway on June 4 and 11, 1999 and October 8 and 15, 1999 to accommodate the installation and removal of temporary access platforms required for the replacement of walkway beams in Span 2 of the Prince Edward Viaduct.

Background:

At its meeting on Wednesday, February 24, 1999, the Commission considered the attached report entitled, "Procurement Authorization - Installation Of Suspended Scaffolds For Replacement Of Walkway Beams On The Prince Edward Viaduct."

The Commission approved the Recommendation contained in the report, as listed below:

"It is recommended that the Commission approve:

1. acceptance of the tender submitted by Scaffold Connection Corporation for the contract period February 24, 1999 to December 31, 2000, in the upset limit amount of $1,305,847.98 for the design, supply, installation and removal of Multi-Point Suspended Scaffolds (MPSS) on the Prince Edward Viaduct to facilitate the removal and replacement of all walkway beams in 1999 and 2000;

2. forwarding this report to the City of Toronto Council requesting approval for weekend closures to road traffic on the Don Valley Parkway on June 4 and 11, 1999 and October 8 and 15, 1999 to accommodate the installation and removal of temporary access platforms required for the replacement of walkway beams in Span 2 of the Prince Edward Viaduct."

The Commission also agreed that if a decision is made in the future to install a permanent Inspection Platform on the Prince Edward Viaduct that staff consider an amendment to this contract to permit the necessary work to be carried out.

The foregoing is forwarded to the Urban Environment and Development Committee and Toronto City Council for consideration of the Commission's request for weekend closures to road traffic on the Don Valley Parkway on June 4 and 11, 1999 and October 8 and 15, 1999 to accommodate the installation and removal of temporary access platforms required for the replacement of walkway beams in Span 2 of the Prince Edward Viaduct.

(A copy of TTC Report No. 10 dated February 24, 1999, appended to the foregoing communication was forwarded to all Members of Council with the agenda of the Urban Environment and Development Committee for its meeting of March 31, 1999, and a copy thereof is on file in the office of the City Clerk)

(City Council on April 13, 14 and 15, 1999, amended this Clause by:

(1) striking out Recommendation No. (2) of the Urban Environment and Development Committee, viz.:

"(2) the report (February 16, 1999) from the General Secretary, Toronto Transit Commission, be adopted;"; and

(2) renumbering the remaining recommendations of the Urban Environment and Development Committee accordingly.)

The Urban Environment and Development Committee recommends that:

(1) the report (March 18, 1999) from the General Manager, Transportation Services be adopted subject to amending Recommendation (1) by amending the times 7:00 a.m, 9:00 a.m., 4:00 p.m., 6:00 p.m. and 3:00 p.m. to read "7:30 a.m., 9:30 a.m., 3:30 p.m., 6:30 p.m, and 4:00 p.m.", so as to read:

(1) contingent on approval of the recommendations from the Toronto Transit Commission to extend the installation of the barriers on Spadina Avenue across all of the remaining mid-block intersections, except Baldwin Street, the existing turn prohibitions, effective between the hours of 7:30 a.m. and 9:30 a.m. and 3:30 p.m. and 6:30 p.m., Monday to Friday and 11:00 a.m. and 4:00 p.m. on Saturday and Sunday, at the intersections of Spadina Avenue and Clarence Square (north leg), Camden Street, Bulwer Street, Phoebe Street, Grange Avenue, Willison Square, Cecil Street, and Oxford Street, be extended to be in effect at all times; and

(2) the report (February 16, 1999) from the General Secretary, Toronto Transit Commission be adopted;

(3) the Commissioner, Works and Emergency Services be requested to undertake a detailed analysis of:

(1) the signalized and non-signalized intersection performance; and

(2) the impact on neighbouring streets; and

(4) a staff working group be established, led by the Chief Planner, to consider:

(a) design issues;

(b) bicycle lands;

(c) TTC needs;

(d) cost requirement options;

(e) what can be achieved in the short term;

and that this working group report to the July 1999 meeting of the Urban Environment and Development Committee.

The Committee reports, for the information of Council, having referred the following recommendations to the Budget Committee for consideration during the 1999 Operating Budget process:

(1) that an appropriate amount be allocated in the 1999 Capital or Operating Budget for the design and installation of permanent barriers on Spadina Avenue by December 1, 1999 and that, in the meantime, temporary barriers be installed on Spadina Avenue to comply with the recommendation of the Toronto Transit Commission and that they be removed upon the installation of the permanent barriers;

(2) that the community be invited, with regards to streetscape, to comment on the design of the barriers; and

(3) that the streetscape design barriers be prepared at the same time as the design of the lanes or edge lines for bicycles.

The Urban Environment and Development Committee submits the following report (March 18, 1999) from the General Manager, Transportation Services:

Purpose:

To introduce full-time turn prohibitions at the mid-block intersections where additional bollards are being recommended on Spadina Avenue.

Funding Sources:

The funds associated with the changes to the turn prohibitions, estimated at $3,000, are contained in the Transportation Services Division 1999 Current Estimates.

Recommendations:

It is recommended that:

(1) contingent on approval of the recommendations from the Toronto Transit Commission to extend the installation of the barriers on Spadina Avenue across all of the remaining mid-block intersections, except Baldwin Street, the existing turn prohibitions, effective between the hours of 7:00 a.m. and 9:00 a.m. and 4:00 p.m. and 6:00 p.m., Monday to Friday and 11:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m. on Saturday and Sunday, at the intersections of Spadina Avenue and Clarence Square (north leg), Camden Street, Bulwer Street, Phoebe Street, Grange Avenue, Willison Square, Cecil Street, and Oxford Street, be extended to be in effect at all times; and

(2) the appropriate by-laws(s) be amended accordingly.

Discussion:

Committee currently has before them a report from the Toronto Transit Commission which recommends that the installation of bollards on Spadina Avenue be extended across the remaining mid-block intersections. Staff of Transportation Services have been involved in the development of the Toronto Transit Commission recommendations. Closing the existing breaks in the barriers will address the continuing incidence of collisions between turning vehicles and streetcars.

In order for the Toronto Transit Commission recommendations to be implemented it is necessary to amend the appropriate by-laws, which currently allow turns at these locations during offpeak periods, to prohibit turns at all times.

Contact Name:

Jacqueline White

Manager, Traffic Operations

Tel. 397-5021

Fax: 392-8504

The Urban Environment and Development Committee also submits the following report (February 16, 1999) from the General Secretary, Toronto Transit Commission:

Recommendation:

Requesting City of Toronto Council to immediately close the openings that have been left in the bollards at the unsignalized intersections on Spadina, as detailed in Exhibit 1 of the attached report entitled "510 Spadina: Update on Collisions," excluding the Baldwin Street intersection which was referred back to staff in order to convene a meeting with City Transportation staff, Councillor Chow and the Community to review the following with a report back once the review has been completed:

(1) the feasibility of installing traffic signals at the Baldwin Street and Spadina Avenue intersection;

(2) the feasibility of moving the traffic signals currently located at the Nassau Street and Spadina Avenue intersection to Baldwin Street and Spadina Avenue; and

(3) the internal street design in the Kensington Market area as to the feasibility of adjusting one-way streets to make St. Andrews Street the main access route to the market.

Background:

At its meeting on Wednesday, February 10, 1999, the Commission considered the attached report entitled, "510 Spadina: Effects of Proposed Traffic Changes on Adjacent Neighbourhoods."

The Commission approved requesting City of Toronto Council to immediately close the openings that have been left in the bollards at the unsignalized intersections on Spadina, as detailed in Exhibit 1 of the attached report entitled "510 Spadina: Update on Collisions," excluding the Baldwin Street intersection which was referred back to staff in order to convene a meeting with City Transportation staff, Councillor Chow and the Community to review the following with a report back once the review has been completed:

(1) the feasibility of installing traffic signals at the Baldwin Street and Spadina Avenue intersection;

(2) the feasibility of moving the traffic signals currently located at the Nassau Street and Spadina Avenue intersection to Baldwin Street and Spadina Avenue; and

(3) the internal street design in the Kensington Market area as to the feasibility of adjusting one-way streets to make St. Andrews Street the main access route to the market.

The Commission also approved the following:

1. That staff request the City Transportation Department to install appropriate clear signage indicating where U-Turns are permitted such signs to be installed at the same time as the bollards are installed.

2. That the Commission support in principle that turns be permitted only at signalized intersections, thus if new signalized intersections are established that associated bollards would be removed.

3. That the following suggestion put forward by Councillor Chow be referred to staff for report with such report to include a possible source of funding for this year:

- Subject to approval of design and cost for a permanent solution, that the community be consulted regarding the streetscaping of the design of the barriers.

- Subject to the approval of cost, that the City Transportation Department undertake a detailed analysis of:

- the signalized and non-signalized intersection performance; and

- impact on neighbouring streets.

- That the streetscape design for barriers be prepared at the same time as the design of the lanes or edge lines for bicycles.

The foregoing is forwarded to the Urban Environment and Development Committee and Toronto City Council for the necessary approval to undertake the immediate closure of the openings that have been left in the bollards at the unsignalized intersections on Spadina Avenue, as detailed in Exhibit 1 of the attached report entitled "510 Spadina: Update on Collisions," with the exception of the Baldwin Street intersection which has been referred back to staff for further analysis.

The Urban Environment and Development Committee also submits the following report (March 29, 1999) from the Commissioner of Urban Planning and Development Services:

Purpose:

To inform Council of the proposed process for determining the final design and associated streetscape treatment for the permanent barriers that are to be installed on Spadina Avenue, south of College Street, to separate the streetcar right of-way from other traffic.

Source of Funds:

Possible funding sources for further streetscaping improvements will be reported upon later by TTC staff after having consulted with other city staff.

Recommendation:

That this report be received for information

Background:

Over the past year TTC and other City staff have produced a number of reports regarding traffic safety concerns associated with the question of the "510: Spadina" streetcar route and how safety matters might best be addressed. On the basis of traffic safety, staff have determined that it is appropriate to physically restrict turning movements along Spadina Avenue, south of College Street, to prevent other traffic from crossing the streetcar tracks and to thereby restrict all turning movements to signalized intersections (with the exception of Baldwin Street, which is still under review). Consequently, the extent of the barrier solution has now been determined and subject to any required traffic monitoring, it is expected that attention can shift to the final design of the permanent barriers and associated streetscaping initiatives.

When City Council dealt with the proposed barriers on Spadina Avenue at its meeting of July 8, 9 and 10, 1998 (see clause No. 45 contained in Report No 8 of the Toronto Community Council), it adopted, among others, the recommendation to:

"Request the TTC and appropriate City officials to consult with local residents to develop options for permanent solutions to the traffic safety problem on Spadina Avenue, and report back to the Toronto Community Council in January 1999 on a recommended proposal along with cost estimates and an implementation schedule."

This report provides an update on where matters stand with respect to the final design of barriers and the opportunity for community involvement in this design process.

Comments:

In an accompanying TTC report entitled "510 Spadina: Follow-up On Commission Directives" (March 23, 1999), it is noted that TTC staff "....will report back separately with the recommendation regarding the budget requirements and possible funding sources for the design and construction of a permanent barrier adjacent to the streetcar right-of-way". This report will be prepared in consultation with other City staff, including the Urban Design Section of the City Planning Division.

Every effort will be made to design the permanent barrier in such a way as to minimize its intrusiveness on the functioning and appearance of Spadina Avenue and to take advantage of any opportunities to enhance the streetscape. However, these efforts will be constrained by physical and financial limitations. There are many competing demands placed on the Spadina right-of-way which constrain the amount of space available for urban design and landscape enhancements. More room is available in certain parts of the corridor than others but, overall, it is a tight fit and the proposal to introduce bicycle lanes (which is currently under study) will exacerbate the situation. Also, neither the TTC nor the City have identified potential funding sources for additional streetscape improvements, at this stage. Clearly, the scope of urban design/landscaping initiatives will be prescribed by the funding available.

Once the physical design limitations are firmly defined and a source of funding known, TTC will consult the city staff and community on relevant design issues. Community input will be key to achieving the best design standards for the barrier along Spadina Avenue and ensuring the best possible fit with the existing corridor conditions. The overall urban design intent is to create a green and pedestrian friendly environment.

Conclusion:

This report provides a brief update on the implementation of the permanent barrier that is to be installed on Spadina Avenue, south of College Street, to separate the streetcar right-of way from other traffic. As the accompanying TTC report (March 23, 1999) points out, staff will be reporting back on possible funding for the design and construction of the barrier. Also, considerations of how the Spadina right-of-way is to be used, particularly as it relates to the recent proposal for bicycles lanes, have to be resolved before final design work on the barrier can proceed. Once these physical and financial limitations are better understood, the TTC will initiate and lead the design process in consultation with the city staff and the community.

Contact Name:

Alka Lukatela

Tel: 416-392-1131

Fax: 416-392-1744

Email: alukatel@toronto.ca

The Urban Environment and Development Committee also had before it TTC Report No. 11 dated February 10, 1999, appended to the communication (February 16, 1999) from the General Manager, TTC, which was forwarded to all Members of Council with the agenda of the Urban Environment and Development Committee for its meeting of March 31, 1999, and a copy thereof is on file in the office of the City Clerk.

(City Council on April 13, 14 and 15, 1999, amended this Clause by adding thereto the following:

"It is further recommended that:

(1) the Commissioner of Urban Planning and Development Services, working in co-operation with School Board officials, be requested to undertake a review of school lands which are subject to possible closure to ensure that the use of these lands and buildings continue to be regarded as community assets and other purposes in the City's interest, and that the zoning on these lands and buildings is consistent with that purpose;

(2) the School Boards be advised that the Commissioner of Urban Planning and Development Services will be undertaking this review of the zoning of all school lands which are subject to possible closure, with a view to ensuring that sufficient protections for the surrounding communities are in place and that public input through the zoning process is ensured wherever possible; and

(3) the Commissioners of Urban Planning and Development Services and Economic Development, Culture and Tourism be requested to meet with representatives of the Toronto District School Board and the Toronto Catholic District School Board to ensure continued access to school buildings and open space and report thereon to the appropriate Committees, such report to include information related to where the revenue from the sale or lease of properties now owned by the School Boards is directed and whether the Holding By-laws are affected.")

The Urban Environment and Development Committee recommends the adoption of the report (March 26, 1999) from the Commissioner of Urban Planning and Development Services.

The Committee reports, for the information of Council, having forwarded a copy of report (March 26, 1999) from the Commissioner of Urban Planning and Development Services and the communication from Councillor Moscoe, to the School Tax Sub-Committee for information.

The Urban Environment and Development Committee submits the following report (March 26, 1999) from the Commissioner of Urban Planning and Development Services:

Purpose:

To provide members of Council with background information regarding the recent announcement by the Toronto District School Board (TDSB) with respect to its intention to lease space within Board-owned buildings presently being used for administrative purposes.

Source of Funds:

None required.

Recommendations:

1. That discussions between the TDSB and City officials regarding the lease of the Board's surplus administrative space be coordinated with the on-going discussions regarding potential surplus educational facilities.

2. That any future discussions with TDSB officials reflect the need to preserve community use of surplus school facilities and any associated open spaces.

3. That this report be forwarded to the TDSB for their consideration.

Background:

The TDSB has recently approved a report which details a capital management strategy for its administrative buildings, which is not available to the public. However, details of the report have been reported in the press. TDSB staff have confirmed that the strategy entails leasing 625,000 square feet of Board-owned administrative space, in response to a reduction of $75 million in Provincial funding annually for the operation and maintenance of these buildings.

Staff from my Department have been working with both the TDSB and the Toronto Catholic District School Board (TCDSB) regarding the disposal of surplus schools. It is important to note that the operation and maintenance of schools is funded separately from administrative space, and any unfunded administrative space is in addition to school facilities which might be designated surplus to requirements.

Comments:

1. Existing Administrative Buildings

Prior to amalgamation, each of the seven former boards of education had headquarters used primarily for administrative purposes, and in some instances used vacant space within local schools as well. Presently, the newly created Board has a total of 1.6 million square feet of administrative space. Reduction of staffing levels, in addition to the need to respond to reduced funding levels for the operation and maintenance of facilities, has prompted a need to rationalize the use of administrative space.

The TDSB administrative capital management strategy identifies the former Toronto Board of Education's facility at 155 College Street as the main headquarters of the new School Board, for its sole use. Portions of the former headquarters located in Scarborough, North York and Etobicoke will be retained for TDSB use, with the remainder to be leased in accordance with Provincial regulations pertaining to the leasing and disposal of property. The proposed use of these properties, as outlined in a recent TDSB newsletter entitled "Transitions Up-date" outlining the plan to consolidate administrative buildings, are described in the chart below.

2. Zoning and Official Plan Designations for Identified Sites

Generally, in the various Official Plans, the sites are designated for institutional or residential uses (Appendix A). The Scarborough location is part of the Civic Centre and is designated City Centre Uses.

The zoning generally permits residential uses which are in character with the surrounding area. Many of the zoning by-laws permit institutional uses, schools and other government uses in residential zones. The Etobicoke location does provide for a wide variety of commercial, office and public uses, but this location is not in a community, it is part of the Civic Centre area.

It is important that the school boards consult with the City to understand the opportunities and the limitations that exist for leasing any of their lands.

3. Community Use Within Identified Sites

All of the administrative buildings are available for community use, ranging from sports activities to public meetings. Three of these facilities were constructed as elementary schools, and two continue to house educational programs which have varying degrees of municipal recreation and public health programming. There are no licensed daycare programs located in any of the administrative sites. TDSB staff have indicated that existing programs will either remain in place in instances where the sites will be retained for educational purposes, or will be re-located to a neighbouring school. Information about the range and extent of the City's use of these facilities is contained in Appendix B.

The use of schools for non-municipal programs, typically on a permit basis, will not be available from the TDSB on a City-wide basis until 2000.

4. Future Uses

The TDSB's ability to lease its properties is governed by Ministry of Education and Training regulations, which are explicit with respect to the public bodies which must receive first right of refusal. In accordance with these regulations, the City's Realty Division of Corporate Services has been contacted by the Board to determine if the City has an interest in leasing any of the available space at fair market value. Property cannot be offered to the other designated parties until all of the other public bodies have been offered the opportunity to lease it.

Conclusions:

Schools are a critical component of the social infrastructure within local communities. Recent reductions in funding will present a significant challenge to residents' continued access to these publicly-funded facilities. City officials can assist in meeting this challenge by ensuring that discussions with the TDSB reflect this important corporate objective.

Contact Name:

Paula Prieditis, Planner

392-0400

Appendix A

Zoning and Official Plan Designations of Surplus Sites

Appendix B

City Use of TDSB Administrative Building Identified as Surplus

The Urban Environment and Development Committee also submits the following resolution (undated) from Councillor Howard Moscoe:

Whereas the Toronto District Board of Education has voted to lease 625,000 square feet of administrative space; and

Whereas this does not include the former main buildings of three Scarborough, Etobicoke, Toronto and North York (375,000 sq. ft.) but primarily satellite locations located in former schools; and

Whereas, as expected, The Board will be seeking the highest and best use of this space; and

Whereas at the same meeting Trustees refused to consider a motion that would have the Board working co-operatively with the City in this endeavour; and

Whereas school buildings and school lands are part of inventory of public assets that belong to the community and function in many instances as park space and community centres;

Therefore be it resolved that planning staff undertake a review of all school lands to ensure that the use of these lands and buildings continue to be regarded as community assets and that the zoning on these lands and buildings are consistent with that purpose; and

Furthermore be it resolved that a preliminary report on this matter be brought forward at the next Urban Environment and Development Committee so that planning staff can received further direction; and

Furthermore be it resolved that the Toronto District Board of Education be put on notice that any use of School lands and buildings will be required to conform to the zoning; and

Furthermore be it resolved that the Board be advised that planning staff will be undertaking a review of the zoning of all school lands with a view to ensuring that sufficient protections for the surrounding communities are in place and that public input through the zoning process is ensured wherever possible.

(City Council on April 13, 14 and 15, 1999, received this Clause, for information.)

(a) 1999 Operating Budget Review.

The Urban Environment and Development Committee reports having:

(1) forwarded the following recommendations to the Budget Committee for consideration during the 1999 Operating Budget process:

(a) that the rejected booking rate for Wheel Trans be held at 2 percent, which represents the same rate as 1998 and that funding for this adjustment be obtained from a portion of the recently announced funding from the Provincial Government for ambulance and health services in the City of Toronto; and

(b) that the $40,000.00 funding for the Cycling Ambassador Program, as provided in 1998, be reinstated in the 1999 Operating Budget.

(2) endorsed the action taken by the Toronto Community Council at its meeting on March 30, 1999 whereby it referred the communication (March 31, 1999) from Dalton Shipway regarding the establishment of a Council of Toronto Watersheds to the Commissioner of Urban Planning and Development Services, the Toronto Regional Conservation Authority and the Environmental Task Force for a report thereon to Budget Committee on April 16, 1999; and

(3) requested the Commissioner of Works and Emergency Services, in consultation with Toronto Regional Conservation Authority, to report back to the Committee with a list of present watershed initiatives in different areas:

(i) (March 25, 1999) from the City Clerk advising that the Budget Committee reports having completed its preliminary review of the 1999 Operating Budget, and directing:

(1) that the 1999 Operating Budget, together with the communication (March 5, 1999) from Councillor Tom Jakobek, Chair, Budget Committee, be forward to all Community Councils and Standing Committees for consideration;

(2) that the preliminary recommendations of the Budget Committee be forwarded to the Community Councils and Standing Committees for information; and

(3) that the Community Councils and Standing Committees be requested to forward their recommendations pertaining to the 1999 Operating Budget to the Budget Committee prior to the commencement of the 'wrap-up' meetings on April 6, 1999.

(ii) (September 24, 1999) from Vincent Rodo, General Secretary, Toronto Transit Commission, forwarding TTC Report No. 4 dated September 23, 1998 respecting the 1999 Wheel-Trans Operating Budget to the City of Toronto Council for:

(1) approval of the 1999 Wheel-Trans Operating Budget of $41.9M provided for in this report and companion documents noting that this budget includes:

- operating funds of $37.4M to provide 1,529,200 trips with a 2 percent unaccommodated rate; and

- operating funds of $4.5M required to purchase 30 low-floor (ELF) buses; and

(2) an increase in the 1998 Operating Budget allocation of $1.4M ($0.8M for the ELF bus purchase price increase and $0.6M as approved by the Commission on June 17, 1998;

(iii) (January 22, 1999) from the City Clerk, Budget Committee, forwarding a presentation from Ms. Joan Doiron, Co-Chair, City of Toronto Pedestrian Committee, regarding pedestrian safety made to the Budget Committee, at its meeting of January 19, 1999;

(iv) (March 31, 1999) from Dalton C. Shipway requesting additional funds to be added to the Operating Budget for the remainder of 1999 for the Council of Toronto Watersheds;

(v) (March 26, 1999) from Charles Caccia, MP for Davenport, House of Commons, supporting Dalton Shipway's request for additional funds;

(vi) (March 29, 1999) from Patrick McNamara, Associate Registrar of the College of Physicians of Ontario, requesting that the City fund a budget item for the Council of the Toronto Watersheds to hire staff;

(vii) (March 30, 1999) from Rodney L.K. Smith;

(viii) (March 30, 1999) from Debbe Crandall, Co-Chair, Save the Oak Ridges Moraine;

(ix) (March 31, 1999) from Joan Doiron, Co-Chair, Toronto Pedestrian Committee;

(x) (March 31, 1999) from Charles and Pleasance Crawford;

(xi) (March 31, 1999) from Betty Lapadula;

(xii) (March 31, 1999) from Sam Savona, Vice-Chairperson, Toronto Transit Commission Advisory Committee on Accessible Transportation;

(xiii) (March 31, 1999) from the Ontario March of Dimes;

(xiv) (March 30, 1999) from Helen Hansen and Joan Doiron, Feet on the Street;

(xv) CAO's presentation to Standing Committees and Community Councils; and

(xvi) Urban Planning and Development Services 1999 Operating Budget Presentation.

The following persons appeared before the Urban Environment and Development Committee in connection with the foregoing matter:

- Sam Savona, ACAT-TCC's Advisory Committee on Accessible Transportation;

- Betty Lapadula;

- Janet Youdell, Ontario March of Dimes;

- Scott Allardyce, Co-Chair, Transportation Action Now;

- Richard Parker;

- Mario Patrone;

- Michael Rosenberg;

- Alan Burke, President, East Beach Community Association;

- Garnet Martin;

- Joan Doiron; and

- Dalton C. Shipway.

(b) Delegation of Consent Approval Authority to Committee of Adjustment (Scarborough).

The Urban Environment and Development Committee reports having referred the following report to Scarborough Community Council for comment and report back to the Urban Environment and Development Committee:

(March 8, 1999) from the Commissioner of Urban Planning and Development Services to delegate consent approval authority under Section 54 of the Planning Act, to the Committee of Adjustment (Scarborough), in order to achieve harmonization of this practice City-wide, and recommending that:

(1) City Council amend Clause 2, City of Toronto By-law No. 671-1998 to delegate approval authority for consent applications to the Committee of Adjustment (Scarborough), instead of the Director, Community Planning (East District); and

(2) this report be forwarded to Scarborough Community Council for comments, prior to the introduction of the necessary Bill in Council.

(c) Proposed Installation of Traffic Control Signals Kingston Road and St. Augustine Seminary/Resthaven Cemetery Driveways (Scarborough Bluffs - Ward 13).

The Urban Environment and Development Committee reports having referred the following report to Scarborough Community Council for consideration and report back to the Urban Environment and Development Committee:

(i) (March 3, 1999) from the General Manager, Transportation Services, seeking approval for the installation of traffic control signals at the intersection of Kingston Road and the St. Augustine Seminary/Resthaven Cemetery driveways, and recommending that:

(1) traffic control signals be approved on Kingston Road at the St. Augustine Seminary/Resthaven Cemetery driveways;

(2) coincident with the traffic control signal installation, northbound left turns be prohibited at all times from the westerly driveway of the St. Theresa Shrine Elementary School at No. 2665 Kingston Road; and

(3) the appropriate by-law(s) be amended accordingly; and

(ii) (March 31, 1999) from Councillor Gerry Altobello requesting that the aforementioned item be referred to the Scarborough Community Council.

(d) Proposed Installation of Traffic Control Signals - McNicoll Avenue and Eagle Point Road (Scarborough-Agincourt - Ward 17).

The Urban Environment and Development Committee reports having deferred consideration of the following report to its May 17, 1999 meeting:

(March 3, 1999) from the General Manager, Transportation Services, seeking approval for the proposed installation of traffic control signals at the intersection of McNicoll Avenue and Eagle Point Road coincident with the removal of the pedestrian crossover (PXO) at McNicoll Avenue and Brookshire Boulevard, and recommending that:

(1) traffic control signals be approved on McNicoll Avenue at Eagle Point Road;

(2) coincident with the traffic control signal installation, the existing pedestrian crossover at McNicoll Avenue and Brookshire Boulevard be removed; and

(3) the appropriate by-law(s) be amended accordingly.

(e) Proposed Installation of Traffic Control Signals - Lake Shore Boulevard East, 30 Metres West of Kew Beach Avenue (East Toronto - Ward 26).

The Urban Environment and Development Committee reports having deferred consideration of the following report until such time that either Ward Councillor requests that it be brought forward for further consideration by the Committee:

(i) (May 20, 1998) from the Interim Functional Lead, Transportation, obtaining approval for the installation of traffic control signals on Lake Shore Boulevard East, 30 metres west of Kew Beach Avenue, and recommending that traffic control signals be approved on Lake Shore Boulevard East, 30 metres west of Kew Beach Avenue; and

(ii) (March 26, 1999) from Councillor Sandra Bussin requesting deferral of this item.

(f) "No Parking" Amendments: Wilson Avenue, between Ridley Boulevard and Clyde Avenue (North York Centre South - Ward 9).

The Urban Environment and Development Committee reports having referred the following report to the General Manager, Transportation Services for further consideration:

(March 17, 1999) from the General Manager, Transportation Services, seeking approval to extend the existing "No Parking Any Time" restrictions on both sides of Wilson Avenue, between Ridley Boulevard and Clyde Avenue, and recommending that:

(1) parking be prohibited at any time on both sides of Wilson Avenue, from the westerly limit of Ridley Boulevard to the easterly limit of Clyde Avenue; and

(2) the appropriate by-law(s) be amended accordingly.

(g) Snow Management Plan (Does not include harmonization issues which were considered by the joint Urban Environment and Development Committee and Works and Utilities Committee on March 16, 1999).

The Urban Environment and Development Committee reports having referred the various recommendations regarding this matter to Council's Special Meeting on April 26 and 27, 1999 for consideration with the recommendations emanating from the joint Urban Environment and Development and Works and Utilities Committees which met on March 16, 1999:

(i) (March 24, 1999) from the General Manager, Transportation Services, recommending that:

(1) road sanding/salting winter operations standards be based on the guidelines for road conditions specified in Table 2 of this report;

(2) road ploughing winter operations standards be based on the guidelines for start snow conditions and route completion times specified in Table 2 of this report;

(3) prior to the initiation of any wide scale snow removal operation on local streets identified as "Yellow Routes" (no boulevards or other space to store snow and/or long term on-street parking is permitted), the Commissioner of Works and Emergency Services meet jointly with the Mayor and the Chairs of the Community Councils; further, the policy would be that snow is removed from both sides of these streets as conditions may dictate;

(4) Council acknowledges that strategically placed, City controlled snow disposal sites with a combined capacity of at least 150,000 loads are critical to the provision of a large scale snow removal operation to the levels of service set out in Table 3 of this report and staff be directed to report back, through the Urban Environment and Development Committee, with a terms of reference for a consultant study to identify and secure the necessary snow disposal sites and appropriate methodologies;

(5) a new consolidated city-wide Snow Emergency By-law, generally in the form provided in Appendix A, be approved and the City Solicitor be requested, in consultation with the Commissioner of Works and Emergency Services, to prepare the necessary Bills and make application to the Chief Regional Judge or any other body for approval of the set fines and wording. The by-law would be consolidated and amended to include the following amendments:

(a) designation of several new routes (details of these will be reported to an upcoming meeting of the Urban Environment and Development Committee);

(b) a provision to exempt cleared locations once snow is removed prior to the termination of the snow emergency period; and

(c) a new provision setting out a more severe infraction and fine of $150.00 for vehicles illegally stopped in a manner which blocks the passage of streetcars during a snow emergency;

(6) Council endorse the principle of deputizing Toronto Transit Commission inspectors to act as temporary parking enforcement officers during snow emergencies with the authority to ticket and tow vehicles which are blocking TTC vehicles, and the City Solicitor, in consultation with the appropriate City staff, TTC and police officials implement the necessary steps to achieve this;

(7) Council endorse a policy of facilitating the moving of vehicles through the enforcement of Highway Traffic Act provisions established for this purpose, accompanied by a $40.00 fine, and a "friendly tow" of vehicles to nearby locations, to provide efficient snow removal on local streets and other streets not encompassed under the Snow Emergency By-law;

(8) a new City-wide by-law for temporarily prohibiting parking on local streets to facilitate snow removal generally in the form provided in Appendix B be approved, and the City Solicitor be requested, in consultation with the Commissioner of Works and Emergency Services, to prepare the necessary Bills and make application as necessary to the Chief Regional Judge or any other body for approval of the set fines and wording;

(9) a new consolidated City-wide Snow and Ice Removal By-law generally in the form provided in Appendix C be approved and the City Solicitor be requested, in consultation with the Commissioner of Works and Emergency Services, to prepare the necessary Bills and make application as necessary to the Chief Regional Judge or any other body for approval of the set fines and wording. The by-law would be consolidated and amended to include the following amendments:

(a) a requirement on property owners to keep sidewalks, adjacent to their properties, clear of snow and ice accumulation (applicable to all locations unless the City offers such a service);

(b) a requirement to clear sidewalks within 12 hours of the end of a snowfall, with a set fine of $105.00, for failure to do so;

(c) maintain the provisions prohibiting the deposit of snow from private properties onto roads, sidewalks and laneways, amend the provisions to make both property owners and their agents or contractors liable for penalties; and increase the set fine for infractions to $300.00 up to a maximum of $5,000.00;

(10) the Communications and Coordination Plan for winter operations described in this report, be adopted for implementation and integration with other City emergency plans being developed; and

(11) winter maintenance for streets with on-street bicycle lanes comprise the following elements:

(a) salting of bicycle lanes in conjunction with regular roadway salting coupled with extra salting when field conditions dictate it to be necessary;

(b) ploughing of snow to the curb in the normal snow ploughing manner and removal of snow from bicycle lanes when the clear bicycle lane is less than 1 m in width; and

(c) increasing patrols by winter services staff to minimize the winter hazards on bicycle lanes;

(ii) (March 24, 1999) from the General Secretary, Toronto Transit Commission, requesting that a portion of the City's Emergency Snow Fund be used to cover the costs and lost revenue which were incurred by the TTC as a result of the January, 1999 snowstorm;

(iii) (March 26, 1999) from the Commissioner of Works and Emergency Services reporting on the option of leasing snow blowers rather than purchasing them and recommending that this report be received for information; and

(iv) (March 25, 1999) from the Commissioner of Works and Emergency Services responding to a series of specific questions raised by the Urban Environment and Development Committee at its meeting of February 8, 1999, in its consideration of a departmental report (January 25, 1999) on the winter operations during the severe January, 1999 storms and recommending that the report be received for information.

(h) Appointment of Trustee Barbara Nash, Toronto District School Board, to the Toronto Pedestrian Committee.

The Urban Environment and Development Committee reports having received the following report for information:

(March 4, 1999) from the City Clerk and Toronto Pedestrian Committee forwarding a communication dated February 1, 1999 from the Director of Education and Secretary-Treasurer, Toronto District School Board, addressed to the City Clerk, advising of the appointment of Trustee Barbara Nash to the Toronto Pedestrian Committee.

(i) Common Bus Specifications.

The Urban Environment and Development Committee reports having received the following report for information:

(February 25, 1999) from Vincent Rodo, General Secretary, Toronto Transit Commission, forwarding TTC Report No. 4 respecting the above for information, and noting that a group of transit properties representing more than 50 percent of the bus purchasers in North America have agreed to a common bus specification and will be meeting with bus manufacturers to advise them of their requirements.

(j) Reports Pending List for Urban Environment and Development Committee - January to December 1998.

The Urban Environment and Development Committee reports having received this matter for information.

(k) Red Light Cameras.

The Urban Environment and Development Committee reports having received the following report for infrmation:

(February 8, 1999) from Councillor Howard Moscoe forwarding his comments on the Provincial Government's regulations respecting the City's pilot project with Red Light Cameras and stating his belief that the Provincial Government did not want red light cameras and are trying to make sure the pilot project fails.

(l) Signalization at Allen Road and Eglinton Avenue.

The Urban Environment and Development Committee reports having referred the following report to the Commissioner of Works and Emergency Services for a report thereon to a future meeting of the Committee:

(March 10, 1999) from Councillor Joe Mihevc requesting a report on signalization - such as flashing amber lights - that could be installed on the Allen Expressway prior to Eglinton Avenue to warn motorists of the ending of the expressway.

(m) Dundas Street Eastbound Bridge Over Kipling Avenue at Six Points Interchange Structure Rehabilitation, Contract No. T-35-99,

Tender No. 1-1999 (Markland-Centennial - Ward 4).

The Urban Environment and Development Committee reports having awarded the contract as recommended in the following report, in accordance with By-law No. 57-1998, the Interim Purchasing By-law, as amended:

(March 8, 1999)from the Commissioner of Works and Emergency Services and Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer advising the results of the Tender issued for the structure rehabilitation on the Dundas Street Eastbound Bridge over Kipling Avenue at Six Points Interchange in accordance with specifications prepared by the Works and Emergency Services Department, and to request authority to issue a contract to the recommended bidder and recommending that:

(1) Contract No. T-35-99, for the structural rehabilitation on the Dundas Street Eastbound Bridge over Kipling Avenue at Six Points Interchange, be awarded to G. Tari Limited in the total amount of $1,843,531.02 including all taxes, charges, and $150,000.00 in contingencies, being the lowest tender received.

(2) the appropriate City of Toronto officials be directed to take the necessary action to give effect thereto.

(n) Eglinton Avenue West over Etobicoke Creek West of Highway 27 - Structure Rehabilitation, Contract No. T-18-99, Tender No. 10-1999 (Markland-Centennial - Ward 4).

The Urban Environment and Development Committee reports having awarded the contract as recommended in the following report, in accordance with By-law No. 57-1998, the Interim Purchasing By-law, as amended:

(March 8, 1999) from the Commissioner of Works and Emergency Services and Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer advising the results of the Tender issued for the structural rehabilitation on Eglinton Avenue West over Etobicoke Creek west of Highway 27 in accordance with specifications as prepared by the Works and Emergency Services Department and to request authority to issue a contract to the recommended bidder and recommending that:

(1) Contract No. T-18-99, for the structural rehabilitation on Eglinton Avenue West over Etobicoke Creek west of Highway 27, be awarded to Grascan Construction Ltd. and Torbridge Construction Ltd. in the total amount of $1,725,040.00 including all taxes, charges, and $150,000.00 in contingencies, being the lowest tender received.

(2) the appropriate City of Toronto officials be directed to take the necessary action to give effect thereto.

(o) Don Valley Parkway Rehabilitation of Crib Walls Between Eastern Avenue and Don Mills Road, Contract No. T-31-99, Tender No. 12-1999 (Don River - Ward 25).

The Urban Environment and Development Committee reports having awarded the contract as recommended in the following report, in accordance with By-law No. 57-1998, the Interim Purchasing By-law, as amended:

(March 8, 1999) from the Commissioner of Works and Emergency Services and Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer advising the results of the Tender issued for the rehabilitation of the crib walls on the Don Valley Parkway between Eastern Avenue and Don Mills Road in accordance with specifications as prepared by the Works and Emergency Services Department and to request authority to issue a contract to the recommended bidder and recommending that:

(1) Contract No. T-31-99, for the rehabilitation of the crib walls on the Don Valley Parkway between Eastern Avenue and Don Mills Road be awarded to Anscon Contracting Inc. and Janscon Holdings Inc. in the total amount of $1,571,130.20 including all taxes, charges, and $142,830.00 in contingencies, being the lowest tender received.

(2) the appropriate City of Toronto officials be directed to take the necessary action to give effect thereto.

(p) Repair of Utility Cuts in Sidewalks, Curbs and Concrete Pavements in District 1 of the City of Toronto - Contract No. 59422-140 (West), Tender Call No. 7-1999 (Toronto High Park, Trinity-Niagara, Davenport, North Toronto, Midtown, Downtown, York Humber and York Eglinton - Wards 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 27 and 28).

The Urban Environment and Development Committee reports having awarded the contract as recommended in the following report, in accordance with By-law No. 57-1998, the Interim Purchasing By-law, as amended:

(March 5, 1999) from the Commissioner of Works and Emergency Services and Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer advising the results of the Tender issued for the repair of utility cuts in sidewalks, curbs and concrete pavements in District 1 of the City of Toronto in accordance with specifications as required by the Works and Emergency Services Department and to request the authority to issue a contract to the recommended bidder and recommending that Contract No. 59422-140 (West), Tender Call No. 7-1999 for the repair of utility cuts in sidewalks, curbs and concrete pavements in District 1 of the City of Toronto be awarded to Maple-Crete Inc. in the total amount of $1,484,095.00 including all taxes and charges being the lowest tender received.

(q) Queensway Bridge over Etobicoke Creek West of the West Mall - Structure Rehabilitation, Contract No. T-9-99, Tender No.11-1999 (Lakeshore-Queensway - Ward 2).

The Urban Environment and Development Committee reports having awarded the contract as recommended in the following report, in accordance with By-law No. 57-1998, the Interim Purchasing By-law, as amended:

(March 15, 1999) from the Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer and the Commissioner of Works and Emergency Services advising of the results of the Tender issued for the rehabilitation of the Queensway Bridge over Etobicoke Creek west of the West Mall in accordance with specifications as prepared by the Works and Emergency Services Department and to request authority to issue a contract to the recommended bidder and recommending that:

(1) Contract No. T-9-99, for the rehabilitation of the Queensway Bridge over Etobicoke Creek west of the West Mall be awarded to Bridgecon Construction Ltd. and Bridgecon Holdings Ltd. in the total amount of $1,649,426.01 including all taxes, charges and $150,000.00 in contingencies, being the lowest tender received; and

(2) the appropriate City of Toronto officials be directed to take the necessary action to give effect thereto.

(r) Revised 1999 Solid Waste Management Service Harmonization Recommendations.

The Urban Enviornment and Development Committee reports having held a joint meeting with the Works and Utilities Committee on March 16, 1999, with respect to the Revised 1999 Solid Waste Management Service Harmonization Recommendations, and having referred various joint recommendation thereon to the Budget Committee.

Respectfully submitted,

JOE PANTALONE

Chair

Toronto, March 31, 1999

(Report No. 5 of The Urban Environment and Development Committee, including additions thereto, was adopted, as amended, by City Council on April 13, 14 and 15, 1999.)