Regional Municipality of Waterloo Planning and Works Committee Agenda

Media Release: Friday, August 18, 2017 4:30 p.m. Regional Municipality of Waterloo

Planning and Works Committee

Agenda

Tuesday, August 22, 2017

Approximately 12:30 p.m. (← Note Time Change)

Regional Council Chamber

150 Frederick Street, Kitchener

1. Declarations of Pecuniary Interest under the Municipal Conflict Of Interest Act

2. Delegations

2.1 TES-TRP-17-17, Iron Horse Trail to Future Transit Hub Active 7 Transportation Connection Environmental Assessment and Preliminary Design Study

a) Myron Steinman

Recommendation:

That the Regional Municipality of Waterloo approve the Hybrid 2-3 alternative route as the Recommended Alternative as detailed in the Iron Horse Trail to Future Transit Hub Environmental Assessment Study and direct staff to proceed with the detailed design and interim implementation measures pending property acquisition, as detailed in Report TES-TRP-17-17, dated August 22, 2017.

Consent Agenda Items

Items on the Consent Agenda can be approved in one motion of Committee to save time. Prior to the motion being voted on, any member of Committee may request that one or more of the items be removed from the Consent P&W Agenda - 2 - August 22, 2017

Agenda and voted on separately.

3. Request to Remove Items from Consent Agenda

4. Motion to Approve Items or Receive for Information

4.1 PDL-CPL-17-23, New Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe 33 (2017) (Information)

4.2 PDL-CPL-17-25, Amendment to the Regional Municipality of 40 Waterloo Controlled Access By-law #58-87 for Access to Regional Road 54 (Lackner Boulevard), City of Kitchener

Recommendation:

That the Regional Municipality of Waterloo approve an amendment to Controlled Access By-law #58-87 for a maintenance access on the east side of Regional Road 54 (Lackner Boulevard), approximately 56 m south of Zeller Drive in the City of Kitchener, as described in Report PDL-CPL-17-25, dated August 22, 2017.

4.3 PDL-LEG-17-54, Authorization to Expropriate Lands (1st Report) for 45 the Reconfiguration of King Street North (Regional Road 15) – Uptown Streetscape Improvement Project, extending from the ION tracks south of Erb Street to Elgin Street (Project 6265), in the City of Waterloo

Recommendation: See page 4.4 PDL-LEG-17-56, Approval to Expropriate Lands (2nd Report) for the 53 Proposed Improvements to Ottawa Street South from Hwy 7 to Charles Street in the City of Kitchener (Phase One)

Recommendation: See pages 53 to 55 4.5 TES-TRS-17-17, Proposed Transportation Demand Management 62 Program Plan: 2017-2021

Recommendation: That the Regional Municipality of Waterloo approve the Transportation Demand Management Program Plan for 2017-2021, as described in report TES-TRS-17-17, dated August 22, 2017, with the implementation of the plan subject to Regional Council’s annual budget deliberations.

4.6 TES-TRP-17-15, Proposed All-way Stop at the Intersection of 75

2435671 P&W Agenda - 3 - August 22, 2017

Snyder’s Road (Regional Road 1) and Sandhills Road, in the Township of Wilmot

Recommendation:

That the Regional Municipality of Waterloo implement an all-way stop at the intersection of Snyder’s Road (Regional Road 1) and Sandhills Road by amending Traffic and Parking By-law 16-023, as amended, to:

a) Remove from Schedule 11, Through Highways, Waterloo Street/Snyder’s Road (Regional Road 1) from the North Side of Huron Street (Regional Road 1) to the West Side of Gingerich Road/Snyder’s Road (Regional Road 6);

b) Add to Schedule 11, Through Highways, Waterloo Street/Snyder’s Road (Regional Road 1) from the North Side of Huron Street (Regional Road 1) to the West Side of Sandhills Road;

c) Add to Schedule 11, Through Highways, Snyder’s Road (Regional Road 1) from the East Side of Sandhills Road to the West Side of Gingerich Road/Snyder’s Road (Regional Road 6); and

d) Add to Schedule 12, Intersection Stop Signs, Snyder’s Road (Regional Road 1) intersecting at Sandhills Road, facing all directions;

in the Township of Wilmot, as outlined in Report TES-TRP-17-15, dated August 22, 2017.

4.7 TES-17-02/COR-FFM-17-11, Proposed Municipal Asset Management 82 Planning Regulation

Recommendation:

That the Regional Municipality of Waterloo endorse the comments previously submitted by Regional staff and attached to report TES-17- 02/COR-FFM-17-11 dated August 22, 2017, as the Region of Waterloo's input to the Province regarding the Proposed Asset Management Planning Regulation.

4.8 COR-FFM-17-14/TES-TRS-17-20, Vehicle Idling (Information) 91

Regular Agenda Resumes

2435671 P&W Agenda - 4 - August 22, 2017

5. Reports – Planning, Development and Legislative Services

Community Planning

5.1 PDL-CPL-17-24, Regionally Owned Properties Adjacent to Schneider 96 Haus

Recommendation:

That the Regional Municipality of Waterloo direct Regional staff to submit Heritage Permit and Demolition Control applications to the City of Kitchener to demolish and replace the houses located at 474 and 484 Queen Street South with landscaping that restores the historic side yard of the original farmstead and enhances this significant cultural heritage landscape, as described in Report PDL-CUL-17-24.

5.2 PDL-CPL-17-26/PDL-LEG-17-57, Ontario Municipal Board Reform - 107 Bill 139 – Building Better Communities and Conserving Watersheds Act, 2017

Recommendation:

That the Regional Municipality of Waterloo forward Report PDL-CPL- 17-26, dated August 22, 2017 to the Minister of Municipal Affairs in response to Bill 139 - (Schedule 3) – the proposed Building Better Communities and Conserving Watersheds Act, 2017: Amendments to the Planning Act and the Conservation Authorities Act.

Reports – Transportation and Environmental Services

Design and Construction

5.3 TES-DCS-17-17, Class Environmental Assessment Study: Weber 129 Street Improvements, Northfield Drive to Blythwood Road, City of Waterloo

Recommendation:

That the Regional Municipality of Waterloo approve the Recommended Design Alternative for Weber Street from Northfield Drive to Blythwood Road in the City of Waterloo as outlined in Report TES-DCS-17-17.

Transit Services

2435671 P&W Agenda - 5 - August 22, 2017

5.4 TES-TRS-17-15, Proposed GRT Business Plan 2017-2021 159 (Presentation)

Recommendation: That the Regional Municipality of Waterloo approve the GRT Business Plan 2017-2021, as described in report TES-TRS-17-15, dated August 22, 2017, with the implementation of the business plan subject to Regional Council’s annual budget deliberations; And that the Regional Municipality of Waterloo direct staff to prepare the preliminary 2018 – 2027 GRT Capital Budget to include the facility, equipment and vehicle capital requirements as set out in the GRT Business Plan.

5.5 TES-TRS-17-19, EasyGO Fare Card Project Update (Information) 242

Transportation

5.6 TES-TRP-17-16, Revised Upset Limit for the Purchase of Traffic 245 Signal Controllers

Recommendation:

That the Regional Municipality of Waterloo approve an increase to the annual upset limit for the purchase of traffic signal controllers and ancillary equipment from $400,000 to $700,000 from Econolite Canada Incorporated (Econolite) plus applicable taxes as required, as described in Report TES-TRP-17-16 dated August 22, 2017.

6. Information/Correspondence

6.1 Council Enquiries and Requests for Information Tracking List 253

7. Other Business

8. Next Meeting – September 12, 2017

9. Adjourn

2435671 P&W Agenda - 6 - August 22, 2017

Next Meetings

Date Time Description Location

Transportation and Environmental Services Tuesday, 5:00 P.M. – Moving Forward Idea Exchange (Public September 12, 2017 (Transportation Master Plan Library) 8:00 P.M. Update) – Progress Report 1 North Square, and Public Consultation Cambridge, Ontario Centre

Wednesday, 5:00 P.M. – Moving Forward Waterloo Memorial September 13, 2017 (Transportation Master Plan Recreation Complex 8:00 P.M. Update) – Progress Report (Hauser Haus) and Public Consultation 101 Father David Bauer Centre Drive Waterloo, Ontario Wednesday, 12:30 P.M.– 2018 GRT Service Waterloo Public Square September 13, 2017 Improvement Plan - Public 75 King Street South 5:30 P.M. Consultation Centre Waterloo, Ontario

Monday, 3:00 P.M. – 2018 GRT Service Country Hills Community September 18, 2017 Improvement Plan - Public Library 8:00 P.M. Consultation Centre Library Seminar Room 1500 Block Line Road Kitchener, Ontario Tuesday, 5:00 P.M. – Moving Forward Kitchener Public Library September 19, 2017 (Transportation Master Plan (Meeting Rooms D/E) 8:00 P.M. Update) – Progress Report 85 Queen Street North, and Public Consultation Kitchener, Ontario Centre

Thursday, 9:30 A.M. – 2018 GRT Service Conestoga Mall September 21, 2017 Improvement Plan - Public 550 King St. N. 9:00 P.M. Consultation Centre Waterloo, Ontario

Wednesday, 2:00 P.M. – 2018 GRT Service Wilfrid Laurier University September 27, 2017 Improvement Plan - Public Concourse - Fred Nichols 7:00 P.M. Consultation Centre Campus Centre 75 University Avenue West Waterloo, Ontario Tuesday, October 3, 3:00 P.M. – 2018 GRT Service Region of Waterloo 2017 Improvement Plan - Public Administrative 7:00 P.M. Consultation Centre Headquarters Main Lobby 150 Frederick Street Kitchener, Ontario

2435671 7 7

Report: TES-TRP-17-17 Region of Waterloo Transportation and Environmental Services Transportation

To: Chair Tom Galloway and Members of the Planning and Works Committee

Date: August 22, 2017 File Code: T04-20/6611

Subject: Iron Horse Trail to Future Transit Hub Active Transportation Connection Environmental Assessment and Preliminary Design Study

Recommendation:

Summary:

The Region of Waterloo, in collaboration with the City of Kitchener, initiated the Iron Horse Trail to Future Transit Hub Active Transportation Connection Environmental Assessment and Preliminary Design Study in March 2017 to examine a number of possible routes to connect the Iron Horse Trail to the future Transit Hub in the City of Kitchener.

A Public Consultation Centre was held on June 6, 2017 and a Pop-Up consultation was held on June 9, 2017 to receive public and stakeholder feedback. The evaluation criteria and a number of alternatives were presented, including a preliminary preferred alternative. While the public generally supports the project, there were many public comments regarding concerns with the on-road sections, including vehicle speeds on proposed shared-use roads and road crossings.

Based on the input gathered from these centres, the Project Team developed a new Hybrid 2-3 Alternative that includes a multi-use trail between the Iron Horse Trail (near 2470219 Page 1 of 26 8 8 August 22, 2017 Report: TES-TRP-17-17

Gage Avenue) and the future Transit Hub (near King Street) in Kitchener, following Schneider Creek into Raddatz Park, using the boulevard of Waverly Road, crossing into Cherry Park, crossing Park Street and running on the east boulevard of Park Street between Stewart Street and the south limit of the GEXR railway bridge. The route would then run along the south side of the GEXR railway to King Street and the future Transit Hub. The Project Team has identified the Hybrid 2-3 alternative as the Recommended Alternative for this project. Please see Attachment 3 for a plan view of the Recommended Alternative.

Staff from the City of Kitchener participated on the project team for this project and are supportive of the Hybrid 2-3 alternative. The estimated cost to implement the Hybrid 2-3 alternative is $2,000,000. The project is funded by the Public Transit Infrastructure Fund (PTIF) and the Region of Waterloo. This project is on a “fast-track” to take advantage of available PTIF funding with a deadline of March 2018.

Report:

The Iron Horse Trail to Future Transit Hub Active Transportation Connection Environmental Assessment and Preliminary Design Study was initiated in March 2017 to examine and evaluate different alternative routes to connect the Iron Horse Trail to the future Transit Hub in the City of Kitchener and complete preliminary design of the approved alternative.

The Region of Waterloo’s Active Transportation Master Plan (2014) and the City of Kitchener‘s Multi Use Pathways and Trail Master Plan (2012) identified the need to review and improve the active transportation connection between the Iron Horse Trail and the future Transit Hub in downtown Kitchener. The goal of this connection is to improve active transportation opportunities and choices which will attract more people to cycle, walk and use public transit. The proposed active transportation connection will promote active living by linking established neighbourhoods, employment nodes and commuter routes to the future Transit Hub.

The project team for this study consists of staff from the Region of Waterloo, the City of Kitchener and WSP Canada Group Ltd, the consulting firm that has been retained by the Region to help in undertaking the study.

Additional Background and Objectives:

The Region is undertaking a Schedule B Municipal Class Environmental Assessment (EA) Study for the Iron Horse Trail to Future Transit Hub Active Transportation Connection. The study limits as shown in Attachment 1 include an area bounded by the Canadian National Railway (CN) to the north, Victoria Street to the south, King Street to the east and the Iron Horse Trail to the west.

2470219 Page 2 of 26 9 9 August 22, 2017 Report: TES-TRP-17-17

The main objectives of this study are to:

• Identify different route alternatives, • Assess and evaluate the alternatives, • Determine the recommended alternative; and • Prepare the preliminary design of the recommended alternative.

Evaluation Criteria

Evaluation criteria were developed and used to assess the route alternatives. The criteria include:

1. Active Transportation Value • Convenience and Connectivity • Facility Types and Transitions • Comfort and Accessibility

2. Socio-Economic / Cultural • Cultural and Built Heritage Impacts • Benefits to Surrounding Land Uses • Private Property Impacts

3. Environmental • Natural Environment

4. Technical • Utility Impacts • Contaminated Soils • Road Crossings • Railway Impacts • Physical Constraints

5. Financial • Capital Cost • Maintenance and Lifecycle Cost

6. Implementation • Phasing / Timing for Implementation

The timing of implementation was seen as particularly critical because part of this project is being funded by the Federal and Provincial governments under the Public Transit Infrastructure Fund (PTIF), which provides funding for eligible expenses up to March 31, 2018.

2470219 Page 3 of 26 10 10 August 22, 2017 Report: TES-TRP-17-17

Alternative Routes

The project team examined 4 major route alternatives, and a variety of sub-alternatives. Attachment 2 contains maps and a detailed description for each of the alternatives. The following alternative solutions were considered in the EA:

• “Do Nothing” (required as part of the EA process)

• Alternative 1 – North side of CN Railway Transit Route Alternatives.

o Alternative 1a – North side of CN Railway from Iron Horse Trail to Park Street, South Side of CN Railway from Park Street to Transit Hub.

• Alternative 2 – Iron Horse Trail, Raddatz Park, Waverly Road, Cherry Park, South Side of CN Railway from Park Street , Stewart Street, to Transit Hub.

o Alternative 2a – Iron Horse Trail, Raddatz Park – south side of the creek, Waverly Road, Cherry Park, South Side of CN Railway from Park Street , Stewart Street, to Transit Hub.

• Alternative 3 – Iron Horse Trail, Cherry Street, South Side of CN Railway from Park Street , Bramm Lands, to Transit Hub.

• Alternative 4 – Iron Horse Trail, Victoria Street, South side of CN Railway from Victoria Street, Park Street, Bramm Lands, to Transit Hub

The “Do Nothing” alternative was evaluated and screened out from further consideration as it would not address the identified problem or opportunity.

As part of the initial evaluation process, the Project Team scored Alternative 3 the highest and this alternative was presented at the Public Consultation Centre as the preliminary preferred alternative.

Public Consultation

A Public Consultation Centre (PCC) was held at the Tannery Event Centre, 155 Charles Street, Kitchener, on June 6, 2017 from 5:00 pm to 8:00 pm. Advertising for the PCC included a Public Information Notice published in the Waterloo Region Record and direct mail-out to all property owners in the study area. In addition to the PCC, a Pop-Up consultation was held on the Iron Horse Trail near Victoria Park on June 9, 2017 between 2:45 pm and 5:15 pm. Sixty eight (68) interested members of the public submitted comments via completed comment sheets, emails, and letters regarding the three following questions:

2470219 Page 4 of 26 11 11 August 22, 2017 Report: TES-TRP-17-17

1. Do you agree/disagree agree with Alternative 3 as the preferred alternative? 2. If you disagree with Alternative 3, which alternative do you prefer and why? 3. Any other comments

The answers to the first 2 questions received are summarized in the table below.

Agree/support Disagree/do not Disagree with Alternative 3 and Prefer Alternative 3 support Alternative* Alternative 3 1 and 1a 2 and 2a 4 27 41 31 16 1

* Some respondents provided more than one preferred alternatives

Comments in support of Alternative 3 were approximately 40%. Some of the 41 respondents who disagreed with Alternative 3 provided more than one other alternative that they preferred. This included a number who noted a preference for Alternative 1, but recognized this may be a long term aspiration and noted Alternative 2 and 2a as short-term or compromise solutions. Some respondents suggested that a combination of Alternatives 2 and 3 should be investigated.

The key reasons mentioned by respondents disagreeing with Alternative 3 include:

• Preference for a connection that is all off-road and discomfort with cycling in a shared lane on Cherry Street between the Iron Horse Trail and Park Street • Concerns with traffic congestion and vehicle speeds on Cherry Street • Concern that the proposed multi-use trail connection below the Goderich-Exeter Railway (GEXR) bridge on Park Street would be too narrow to accommodate pedestrians and 2-way cyclist travel • Difficulty with crossing Park Street at Cherry Street due to motor vehicle volume and speed on Park Street, in particular during peak hours.

Some of the key reasons mentioned by respondents for preference of Alternative 1 include:

• Most direct – with fewest changes in direction, therefore easy to navigate • Entirely off-road, and • A potential benefit / attractor for future owners and tenants of commercial/ employment and residential for future development, particularly on the north side of the Canadian National Railway (CN) line between the Iron Horse Trail and Strange Street.

Some respondents recognized that Alternative 1 could not be achieved in the short term and would not meet the requirement of the PTIF grant because of many factors including lack of space, existing buildings on the north side of the CN line east of Park

2470219 Page 5 of 26 12 12 August 22, 2017 Report: TES-TRP-17-17

Street, and the high capital cost of this alternative. However, the Project Team agreed that Alternative 1 should continue to be pursued as a longer term goal from an active transportation planning perspective.

Based on the comments received, the Project Team conducted further review and developed a Hybrid Alternative composed of portions of Alternative 2 and 3.

The Hybrid 2-3 Alternative, as shown in Attachment 3, runs from the Iron Horse Trail at Gage Avenue and follows the north side of Schneider Creek into Raddatz Park. Then the route runs on the north boulevard of Waverly Road and crosses into Cherry Park. The route then crosses Park Street and runs on the east boulevard of Park Street between Stewart Street and the south limit of the GEXR railway bridge. The route then runs along the south side of the GEXR railway to King Street and the future Transit Hub.

The Hybrid 2-3 Alternative would address the problem of connecting the Iron Horse Trail to the Future Transit Hub and would address a number of public concerns by:

• Providing an off-road facility for the entire length of the route;

• Achieving a 3.0 metre wide multi-use trail (MUT) on the entire length of the corridor except for a very short distance on Park Street below the GEXR bridge. Although the width at this section is less than 3 meters, the MUT would continue to be compliant with the Ontario Traffic Manual (OTM) Book 18 Cycling Facilities guidance for two way MUTs. That section could be widened in the future if the GEXR bridge were rehabilitated or replaced

• Formalizing a connection that is being used currently (i.e. a “beaten” path along sections of Schneider Creek through Raddatz Park;

• Enabling construction of significant portions of the route in the short term and taking full advantage of the available PTIF grant;

• Locating the crossing point of Park Street further north and away from the GEXR railway bridge, improving sight lines;

• Providing further choices and alternative routes in the core area and surrounding the Transit Hub when Alternative 1 is achieved in future.

Attachment 4 summarizes the evaluation of the alternatives, including Hybrid 2-3. While the Hybrid 2-3 alternative does not score as highly as Alternative 3 in some aspects, the Project Team agreed that it was the best alternative, addressing many of the public concerns while still being feasible to implement in the short term.

The Hybrid 2-3 Alternative route would cross Gage Avenue, Strange Street, and Park Street which are all City of Kitchener roads. These crossing points would be reviewed 2470219 Page 6 of 26 13 13 August 22, 2017 Report: TES-TRP-17-17

during detail design and appropriate facilities would be considered to provide convenient crossings to the multi-use trail users. These facilities could include pedestrian refuge islands, dropped curbs, or Level 2 Pedestrian Crossovers.

The existing intersection pedestrian signal on Strange Street in front of St. John’s Catholic School could be relocated south to take advantage of the new trail location. The potential issues with the sight distance and geometric design would be reviewed with the City of Kitchener during the detail design.

Conclusions

The Project Team concluded that a multi-use trail can be implemented between the Iron Horse Trail and Future Transit Hub in Kitchener. The recommended alternative is the Hybrid 2-3 Alternative as described in Attachment 3. The Project Team also concluded that Alternative 1 is favoured as a long term goal as this alternative is the most direct connection, entirely off-road, and attractive for future developments on the north side of the CN line between the Iron Horse Trail and Strange Street.

Interim Design Measures

The implementation of the Hybrid 2-3 Alternative (MUT) on the north boulevard of Waverly Road would require land acquisition, and an on-street signed route would be required as an interim measure. The traffic volumes and the speed data reviewed at this location indicate that this measure is appropriate based on guidance in Ontario Traffic Manual Book 18 – Cycling Facilities. Pedestrians would use the existing sidewalk and cyclists would travel on the street sharing the space with motor vehicles, as shown in Attachment 5.

The section of the MUT east of Joseph Street also would not be feasible until access can be secured on privately owned lands (i.e. University of Waterloo) and the proposed pedestrian bridge over King Street at the Transit Hub has been constructed. As an interim measure, the multi-use trail west of Joseph Street would connect to Victoria Street via Joseph Street. This measure would require providing a continuous sidewalk along Joseph Street, as shown in Attachment 6.

Project Team Recommendations

The Project Team recommends that:

1. The Region proceed with Hybrid 2-3 as the Recommended Alternative for detailed design and construction and secure easements / ownership of land for the sections east of Joseph Street and along Waverly Road.

2. The Region and the City of Kitchener coordinate construction of the trail, including the interim sidewalk along Joseph Street and the signed route on 2470219 Page 7 of 26 14 14 August 22, 2017 Report: TES-TRP-17-17

Waverly Road.

3. The Region and the City of Kitchener, as a long term planning goal, continue to pursue the Alternative 1 alignment in planning applications.

Next Steps

Subject to Regional Council approval of Hybrid 2-3 as the Recommended Alternative, the following next steps would be taken:

• A “Notice of Completion” to the Iron Horse Trail to Future Transit Hub Active Transportation Connection Environmental Assessment (EA) would be issued and the project file would be made accessible to the public for review. If no concern is raised within the 30 days review period, the EA would be filed and completed.

• Initiate the detailed design of the Hybrid 2-3 Alternative

• Start the construction of some aspects of the recommended alternative immediately after approving the EA (e.g. Joseph Street sidewalks, pavement markings, signage, paving of the existing sections of stone dust trails through Raddatz Park and Cherry Park, etc.) to maximize the use of available PTIF funding in 2017 and 2018.

This project exhibits very tight timelines and construction may be difficult to complete by the March 2018 deadline of PTIF funding. Some detail design activities (geotechnical and legal surveying) have already been initiated to maximize the ability to take advantage of these funds. The PTIF program currently allows up to 40% of eligible funds to be extended through the March 2018 deadline, and the Region and many other municipalities across Canada have requested the Federal government to extend the deadline for full funding beyond March 2018. Portions of the project, particularly those subject to property acquisition, may need to be completed after the PTIF program has ended.

Area Municipal Consultation / Coordination

The City of Kitchener is actively participating in the project team. The City supports the implementation of the Hybrid 2-3 Alternative.

Corporate Strategic Plan:

The Iron Horse Trail to Future Transit Hub Active Transportation Connection EA supports the Region’s Strategic Focus Area 2 related to the Sustainable Transportation, and in particular, the following Strategic Objective:

2470219 Page 8 of 26 15 15 August 22, 2017 Report: TES-TRP-17-17

• Build infrastructure for, and increase participation in, active forms of transportation (cycling and walking).

It also influences all other Focus Areas, namely:

• Thriving Economy; • Environment and Sustainable Growth, and • Healthy, Safe and Inclusive Communities.

Financial Implications:

The estimated cost to implement the Hybrid 2 -3 alternative is $2,000,000.

The Federal and Provincial governments are providing funds to the Region to improve transit facilities under the Public Transit Infrastructure Fund (PTIF). The program provides funding for eligible expenses up to March 31, 2018. The Region has requested that this deadline be extended to enable the Region to access more of the PTIF funds for this project. Regional Council previously approved the PTIF for the Iron Horse Trail to Future Transit Hub connection. The PTIF award of $1.3M was matched by Regional funding of $1.3M, for a total of $2.6M. The Regional share is to be funded from debentures.

Other Department Consultations / Concurrence:

Nil

Attachments:

Attachment 1 – The Study Area Attachment 2 – Alternative Routes, Description and Maps Attachment 3 – Hybrid 2-3 Preferred Alternative Route Attachment 4 – Evaluation Criteria Attachment 5 – Waverly Road Section Interim Measure Attachment 6 – East of Joseph Street Section Interim Measure

Prepared By: Hanan Wahib, Senior Transportation Planning Engineer

Approved By: Thomas Schmidt, Commissioner, Transportation and Environmental Services

2470219 Page 9 of 26 16 16 August 22, 2017 Report: TES-TRP-17-17

Attachment 1 – The Study Area

2470219 Page 10 of 26 17 17 August 22, 2017 Report: TES-TRP-17-17

Attachment 2 – Alternative Routes, Description and Maps

-Alternative 1-

2470219 Page 11 of 26 18 18 August 22, 2017 Report: TES-TRP-17-17

Alternative 1 – North Side of CN Railway: Alternative 1 is a continuous multi- use trail on the north side of the CN railway right-of-way from the Iron Horse Trail to King Street. It is located within the CN right-of-way adjacent to the north limit of the right-of-way, or on privately-owned lands on the north side of the CN right-of- way. The route crosses Strange Street and Park Street immediately adjacent to the existing railway crossing of these streets, on the north side of the existing railway crossing.

At King Street the multi-use trail is at the same level / elevation as the railway line; and a set of stairs or ramps would be required to bring the trail down to the same level / elevation as King Street, using the new underpass to King Street. In this area, pedestrians and cyclists would use the future multi use trail on King Street to the intersection of King Street and Victoria Street to cross over to the Transit Hub.

2470219 Page 12 of 26 19 19 August 22, 2017 Report: TES-TRP-17-17

-Alternative 1a-

2470219 Page 13 of 26 20 20 August 22, 2017 Report: TES-TRP-17-17

Alternative 1a – North Side of CN Railway from Iron Horse Trail to Park Street, South Side of CN Railway from Park Street to Transit Hub

Alternative 1a is a continuous multi-use trail from the Iron Horse Trail to the Transit Hub. Between the Iron Horse Trail and Park Street, it is located on the north side of the CN railway right-of-way, within the right-of-way adjacent to the north limit, or on privately owned lands in the immediate north side of the right-of-way.

At Park Street, the multi-use trail crosses to the south side of the CN railway right-of-way, within the right-of-way on the south side of the right-of-way, or on privately owned lands on the immediate south side of the railway right-of-way. The trail crosses a private parcel of land between the CN railway line and the Goderich Exeter Railway (GEXR) line, and then crosses the GEXR at the north end of Joseph Street and the existing private railway crossing. This private railway crossing would require upgrading to a public crossing with ownership assumed by the City of Kitchener.

From this point eastward the multi-use trail follows the south side of the GEXR / CN railway right-of-way, crossing two properties owned by the University of Waterloo and one other privately owned property. At King Street, a pedestrian bridge at the level / elevation of the railway line crosses over the street to the Transit Hub. The pedestrian bridge is part of the design of the Transit Hub

2470219 Page 14 of 26 21 21 August 22, 2017 Report: TES-TRP-17-17

-Alternative 2-

2470219 Page 15 of 26 22 22 August 22, 2017 Report: TES-TRP-17-17

Alternative 2 – Iron Horse Trail, Raddatz Park-north side of the creek, Waverly Rd, Cherry Park, South side of CN Railway from Park St, Stewart Street, to Transit Hub

Alternative 2 is a combination of multi-use trail and on-street signed route. Heading east from the Iron Horse Trail the route runs parallel to Gage Avenue, for approximately 30 metres, then follows the north side of Schneider Creek into Raddatz Park. Passing through the Park it meets the western end of Waverly Road, where it becomes an on-street signed route. Pedestrians would use the existing sidewalk and cyclists would travel on the street, sharing space with motor vehicles. Painted sharrow markings on the street would guide cyclists and remind motorists to expect cyclists on the street. Bike lanes would not be provided, as the volume and speed of motor vehicle traffic is low on Waverly Road.

The route crosses into Cherry Park at the intersection of Waverly Road and Park Street. The existing pedestrian signal approximately 50 metres north on Strange Street in front of St. John’s Catholic School provides a controlled crossing of Strange Street for users if desired, otherwise users will wait for a gap in traffic and cross Strange Street at Waverly Road at the appropriate time. Improvements to the route through the parking lot will define the trail route and separate trail users from vehicles using the parking lot. The trail continues east through Cherry Park, following the existing trail alignment to Park Street. Improvements to the trail in Cherry Park would include hard surfacing with asphalt.

The route crosses Park Street at the Stewart Street intersection, and then proceeds east along Stewart St. to the end of the street. Crossing improvements would be considered at the Stewart Street intersection to facilitate crossing of Park Street. Similar to Waverly Road, cyclists would share the space on Stewart Street with motor vehicles and pedestrians would use the sidewalk.

At the east end of Stewart Street the route transitions to a multi-use trail, crossing over a private parcel of land between the CN railway line and the Goderich Exeter Railway (GEXR) line. The route crosses the GEXR at the north end of Joseph Street and the existing private railway crossing. This private railway crossing would require upgrading to a public crossing with ownership assumed by the City of Kitchener.

From this point eastward the multi-use trail follows the south side of the GEXR/CN railway right-of-way, crossing 2 properties owned by the University of Waterloo and one other privately owned property. At King Street a pedestrian bridge at the level / elevation of the railway line crosses over the street to the Transit Hub. The pedestrian bridge is part of the design of the Transit Hub.

2470219 Page 16 of 26 23 23 August 22, 2017 Report: TES-TRP-17-17

Alternative 2a-

2470219 Page 17 of 26 24 24 August 22, 2017 Report: TES-TRP-17-17

Alternative 2a – Iron Horse Trail, Raddatz Park-south side of the creek, Waverly Rd, Cherry Park, South side of CN Railway from Park St, Stewart Street, to Transit Hub

Alternative 2a is identical to Alternative 2, with the exception of the far west end of the route. Leaving the Iron Horse Trail approximately 20m south of Gage St. the route travels on the south side of Schneider Creek for approximately 125m, where it crosses over the creek into Raddatz Park via a new pedestrian bridge. The 125m section on the south side of Schneider Creek follows an informal, well- used footpath and also provides access to Schneider Creek Community Gardens. Heading east from the proposed pedestrian bridge in Raddatz Park, Alternative 2a follows exactly the same route as Alternative 2 to the Transit Hub.

2470219 Page 18 of 26 25 25 August 22, 2017 Report: TES-TRP-17-17

-Alternative 3-

2470219 Page 19 of 26 26 26 August 22, 2017 Report: TES-TRP-17-17

Alternative 3 – Iron Horse Trail, Cherry St, Park St, South side of CN Railway from Park St, Bramm Lands, to Transit Hub

Alternative 3 is a combination of multi-use trail and on-street signed route. Heading east from the Iron Horse Trail the route links to Cherry Street at the existing trail entrance and follows Cherry Street. Pedestrians would use the existing sidewalk and cyclists would travel on the street, sharing space with motor vehicles. Painted sharrow markings on the street would guide cyclists and remind motorists to expect cyclists on the street. Bike lanes would not be provided, as the volume and speed of motor vehicle traffic is low on Cherry Street.

The route crosses Park Street at the Cherry Street intersection, then proceeds south in the east boulevard along Park Street. Crossing improvements would be considered at the Cherry Street intersection to facilitate crossing of Park Street. A short section of multi-use trail on the east side of Park Street would pass below the GEXR railway bridge. In the short term minor improvements would be made to the area below the bridge to maximize pedestrian and cyclist space and provide some separation from motor vehicles. Additional space for the multi-use trail connection would be provided on the east side of Park Street when the railway bridge requires replacement in the future.

Heading east from Park Street the multi-use trail route passes through the Bramm Lands, which are owned by the City of Kitchener and formerly housed one of the City’s Operations yards. Redevelopment plans include a multi-use trail passing through the site near the north limit of the property/south limit of the GEXR railway right-of-way to Joseph Street. From this point eastward the multi- use trail follows the south side of the GEXR/CN railway right-of-way, crossing 2 properties owned by the University of Waterloo and one other privately owned property. At King Street a pedestrian bridge at the level / elevation of the railway line crosses over the street to the Transit Hub. The pedestrian bridge is part of the design of the Transit Hub.

2470219 Page 20 of 26 27 27 August 22, 2017 Report: TES-TRP-17-17

-Alternative 4-

2470219 Page 21 of 26 28 28 August 22, 2017 Report: TES-TRP-17-17

Alternative 4 – Iron Horse Trail, Victoria St, South side of CN Railway from Victoria St, Park St, Bramm Lands, to Transit Hub

Alternative 4 is a combination of on-street signed route and multi-use trail. The first leg of the route follows Victoria Street from the Iron Horse Trail to Walnut Street. Pedestrians would use the existing sidewalk on the north side of Victoria Street and cyclists would use the existing on-street bike lanes. The available Victoria Street right-of-way, numerous driveways, utilities, and grades/slopes on the north side of the street preclude the ability to provide a multi-use trail along this section.

East from Walnut Street the route is located within the GEXR railway right-of- way, and would require negotiations and a lease from the railway to accommodate a City-designed and managed multi-use trail along this section. A ramped section of trail would be required to create the transition between the higher level/elevation of the railway line and lower level/elevation of Park Street. The multi-use trail design would require a trail crossing of Park Street in the vicinity of the entrance to the Bramm Lands.

2470219 Page 22 of 26 29 29 August 22, 2017 Report: TES-TRP-17-17

Attachment 4 – Hybrid 2-3 Preferred Alternative Route

2470219 Page 23 of 26 30 30 August 22, 2017 Report: TES-TRP-17-17

Attachment 5 – Evaluation Criteria

Alternatives Evaluation Criteria

Hybrid 2-3 Do Nothing Alternative 1 Alternative 1a Alternative 2 Alternative 2a Alternative 3 Alternative 4 (Recommended) Individual Criterion Grouping Within Group

Convenience and Connectivity

Facility Types and Transitions Active TransportationActive Value Comfort and Accessibility

Cultural Heritage (Archaeology) and Built Heritage (Heritage Buildings)

Benefits to Surrounding Lands Socio-Economic / Cultural

Private Property Impacts

Natural Environment Natural Environment

Utility Impacts

Contaminated Soils

Road Crossings Technical

Railway Impacts

Physical Constraints

meets criteria / no impact to low

Capital Cost impact (4) meets criteria for the most part /

Financial low impact to medium impact (3) Maintenance and lifecycle Cost partially meets criteria / medium

impact (2)

Phasing / Timing for only somewhat meets criteria / Implementation medium to high impact (1) Implementation does not meet criteria / high Score 34 33 34 37 37 42 45 30 Overall Score impact (0)

2470219 Page 24 of 26

31 31 August 22, 2017 Report: TES-TRP-17-17

Attachment 6 – Waverly Road Section/Interim Measure

2470219 Page 25 of 26 32 32 August 22, 2017 Report: TES-TRP-17-17

Attachment 7 – East of Joseph Street Section/Interim Measure

2470219 Page 26 of 26 33 33

Report: PDL-CPL-17-23 Region of Waterloo

Planning, Development and Legislative Services

Community Planning

To: Chair Tom Galloway and Members of the Planning and Works Committee

Date: August 22, 2017 File Code: D16-60

Subject: New Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe (2017)

Recommendation:

For information.

Summary:

On May 18, 2017, the Province of Ontario released a new Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe (Growth Plan) following a multi-year review and public consultation process. The new Growth Plan replaces the previous Growth Plan issued on June 16, 2006 and came into effect on July 1, 2017. This report provides some brief background on the new Growth Plan, highlights the key policy changes and outlines how the changes will affect the Region of Waterloo.

The new Growth Plan builds upon the framework set out in the 2006 Growth Plan. There are several new policy areas and policy refinements that will require collaboration with the Province and Area Municipalities in order to implement. These include new polices regarding municipal comprehensive review, major transit station areas, employment areas, natural heritage, agricultural systems, infrastructure, climate change and revised density and intensification targets.

Overall, the changes to the Growth Plan align with and will help implement Regional Council’s vision for a more livable, healthy and compact communities as expressed through the ROP.

Report:

The Growth Plan provides policy direction on matters of Provincial interest relating to

2427808 Page 1 of 7 34 34 August 22, 2017 Report: PDL-CPL-17-23

growth and development in the Greater Golden Horseshoe (GGH). The Growth Plan applies to 21 upper- and single-tier municipalities in the GGH including the entirety of the Region of Waterloo.

Under the Planning Act, all planning decisions must conform to the policies of the Growth Plan. As a result, Regional and Area Municipal planning staff refer to the Growth Plan on a regular basis in their work and the policies of the Regional Official Plan (ROP) and the Area Municipal Official Plans must conform to the Growth Plan.

Prior to releasing the new Growth Plan, the Province completed an extensive public consultation process that began in February 2015. In May 2016, the Province released a draft of the Proposed Growth Plan and invited comments from municipalities and other key stakeholders. The Region of Waterloo participated in this review and expressed its general support as well as suggested revisions to the proposed policies (see Report PDL-CPL-16-41).

Regional staff continue to endorse the objectives of the Growth Plan which aim to revitalize downtowns, create complete communities, provide greater housing choice, curb sprawl and improve access to transportation choices. The changes to the Growth Plan are intended to provide a foundation on how to accommodate growth in the GGH in a more sustainable way by providing for development of a more compact and transit- supportive urban form and by protecting the region’s valuable farmlands and natural resources.

What are the key policy changes in the new Growth Plan?

In addition to building on the policy direction of the 2006 Growth Plan, the scope of the new Growth Plan has been expanded to provide more detailed direction on municipal comprehensive review, major transit station areas, employment areas, natural heritage, agricultural systems, infrastructure, climate change and revised density and intensification targets. Several key areas of change in the new Growth Plan include:

1. Intensification Target

• The Intensification Target has been increased from 40% to 60% of residential development to occur annually in the delineated built-up area. Table 1 demonstrates how the increase is phased in over the planning horizon (2041) of the new Growth Plan.

2427808 Page 2 of 7

35 35 August 22, 2017 Report: PDL-CPL-17-23

Table 1 – Phasing of the 2017 Growth Plan Intensification Target

July 1, 2017 Next Municipal (target in effect Planning Horizon Comprehensive 2031-2041 in approved Review ROP)

Intensification Target (% of all residential 45% 50% 60% development to occur annually in the delineated built-up area)

2. Designated Greenfield Area Density Target

• The Designated Greenfield Area (DGA) Density Target has been increased from 50 to 80 persons and jobs per hectare. • The target is measured over the entirety of the DGA, with the exception of the new and expanded areas of “net out”. Areas that are not to be included in the calculation of the density target (“net outs”) include: natural heritage areas and features, natural heritage systems, floodplains, rights of way for electricity transmission lines and energy transmission pipelines, freeways, railways, employment areas and cemeteries. • The revised target comes into effect following the next municipal comprehensive review (MCR) of the ROP. Until that time, the density targets contained in the ROP continue to apply. • As part of a MCR, outer ring municipalities (which include the Region of Waterloo) can request an alternative density target.

3. Major Transit Station Areas

• New requirement to delineate Priority Transit Corridors and Major Transit Station Areas (MTSA) in official plans • New density target for MTSA (160 residents and jobs/hectare for LRT/BRT, 150 residents and jobs/hectare for GO Transit) • Alternative density requirements may be requested through a MCR, including the averaging of the target across multiple station areas 2427808 Page 3 of 7

36 36 August 22, 2017 Report: PDL-CPL-17-23

4. Settlement Area Boundary Expansions

• New planning horizon year, municipalities are required to designate land required to accommodate growth to 2041 • A Land Needs Assessment Methodology is to be released by the Province by the end of 2017 that must be used to determine land required to accommodate growth • Through the Land Needs Assessment Methodology, outer ring municipalities may identify Excess Lands and if identified are required restrict development on these lands to 2041. Excess Lands are lands within the designated greenfield area that have been designated for development but are in excess of what is needed to accommodate forecasted growth to 2041 as identified through the land needs assessment. • New criteria to assess the feasibility of settlement boundary expansions including an assessment of agricultural impacts, alignment with stormwater master plans or equivalents, and consideration of the financial viability of infrastructure and public service facilities over the life cycle of these assets

4. Municipal Comprehensive Review

• Must be initiated by an upper- or single-tier municipality (previously could be initiated by any municipality) • A MCR can only be undertaken during a Planning Act Section 26 review of an Official Plan and is subject to approval by the Province

5. Employment Lands

• New requirement for upper-tier municipalities to designate Employment Lands in their official plans • New category of employment areas, Prime Employment. These are employment areas that are land intensive, have low employment densities and require locations that are adjacent or near major goods movement facilities or corridors • New requirement to complete an Employment Strategy and set density targets for employment areas • Employment conversions can now only take place through a MCR of an upper- or single-tier official plan

6. Natural Heritage

• The Province released the draft Natural Heritage System mapping for the GGH on July 6, 2017 for comment. Staff are in the process of reviewing the draft mapping

2427808 Page 4 of 7

37 37 August 22, 2017 Report: PDL-CPL-17-23

• New requirement to incorporate into the ROP the Natural Heritage System and associated policies to maintain, restore or enhance the diversity and connectivity of the system

7. Agricultural System

• The Province released the draft Agricultural System mapping for the GGH on July 6, 2017 for consultation. Staff are in the process of reviewing the draft mapping • New requirement to designate Prime Agricultural Areas in accordance with the Agricultural System mapping and protect these areas for long-term use as agriculture

8. Climate Change

• New requirement to establish official plan policies to identify actions to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and address climate change adaptation goals • The Ministry of the Environment and Climate Change will release guidance documents by the end of 2017 to assist municipalities in the establishment of greenhouse gas inventories and targets as well as the development of community energy and emissions reduction strategies

9. Integrating Infrastructure and Land Use Planning

• New requirement to prioritize infrastructure investments to support intensification • Plans for new infrastructure to occur in an integrated manner based on long- range land use planning and financial planning and is to be supported by infrastructure master plans • Co-ordination of infrastructure planning/investment and land use planning required to implement the new Growth Plan

How will the new Growth Plan affect the Region of Waterloo?

The new Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe came into effect on July 1, 2017. Pursuant to the Planning Act, all decisions made on or after July 1, 2017 must conform to the new Growth Plan. Ontario Regulation 311/06 prescribes transition regulations related to the Growth Plan but does not provide relief for all planning matters commenced from the policies of the new Growth Plan.

As a result, Regional staff is currently consulting with the Province and the Area Municipalities to determine the impact of the new Growth Plan on several ongoing planning initiatives such as Station Area Planning, Official Plan Conformity Exercises, 2427808 Page 5 of 7

38 38 August 22, 2017 Report: PDL-CPL-17-23

Township Rationalizations Exercises and the ROP Amendment to implement the 2031 B population forecasts of the 2006 Growth Plan.

The Region is required to undertake a MCR and related amendment(s) to the ROP to conform to the new Growth Plan. Regional staff will report back to Council on the comprehensive work plan related to the MCR of the ROP.

There are several new policy areas and policy refinements in the new Growth Plan that will require collaboration with the Province, Area Municipalities, the GRCA and other Regional departments in order for it to be implemented. These include new polices regarding municipal comprehensive review, major transit station areas, employment areas, natural heritage, agricultural systems, revised density and intensification targets and the integration of infrastructure planning/investment and land use planning.

The Province has committed to release a number of supplementary direction documents to assist in the implementation of the new Growth Plan. These include a Land Needs Assessment Methodology, an Agricultural System, and a Natural Heritage System. The Province has also committed to releasing a number of guidance documents to also assist implementation. These may include guidance on the employment strategy, the housing strategy, agricultural impact assessment, the establishment of greenhouse gas inventories and targets as well as the development of community energy and emissions reduction strategies.

Area Municipal Consultation/Coordination

Regional staff met and consulted with Area Municipal and GRCA staff throughout the review process on the Proposed Growth Plan in 2015/2016. Implementation of the new Growth Plan will require collaboration between the Region, the Area Municipalities and the GRCA. This report has been provided to Area Municipal and GRCA staff for information.

Corporate Strategic Plan:

The new Growth Plan support the Region’s priorities with respect to Focus Area 2 (Growth Management and Prosperity) and Focus Area 3 (Sustainable Transportation) of the Corporate Strategic Plan.

Financial Implications:

Implementation of the new Growth Plan will require the Region to undertake a Municipal Comprehensive Review and update the ROP accordingly. The Region’s approved 2017-2026 Community Planning Capital Program included a budget of $1,382,100 in 2017, 2018 and 2019 for Regional Smart Growth Initiative (project 22007) to be funded from the RDC Reserve Fund (90%; $1,243,900) and from the property tax levy (10%; 2427808 Page 6 of 7

39 39 August 22, 2017 Report: PDL-CPL-17-23

138,200). To date, $275,200 has been committed or spent, leaving a balance of $1,106,900. Regional staff will report back to Council on the work plan and the financial implications of this process at a later date.

Other Department Consultations/Concurrence:

Staff from Transportation and Environmental Services, Community Services, Public Health and Legal Services will all play an important role in implementing the policies of the Growth Plan. Planning staff will continue to consult, collaborate and coordinate with each of these departments to ensure that the Region’s policies and programs conform to the new Growth Plan.

Prepared By: Alyssa Bridge, Principal Planner

Michelle Sergi, Director of Community Planning

Approved By: Rod Regier, Commissioner, Planning, Development and Legislative Services

2427808 Page 7 of 7

40 40

Report: PDL-CPL-17-25 Region of Waterloo Planning, Development and Legislative Services Community Planning

To: Chair Tom Galloway and Members of the Planning and Works Committee

Date: August 22, 2017 File Code: T15-40/54, C13/20/CA

Subject: Amendment to the Regional Municipality of Waterloo Controlled Access By-law #58-87 for Access to Regional Road 54 (Lackner Boulevard), City of Kitchener

Recommendation:

Summary:

Nil

Report:

By-law #58-87, a By-law to “Designate and Regulate Controlled – Access Roads” was enacted to control the construction or alteration to the geometric design of any private means of access to a Regional Road. All Regional Roads are included in either Schedule “A” or Schedule “B” of the By-law. Regional Roads included in Schedule “A” (Controlled Access – Prohibited) include arterial roads and freeways where access to these roads must be restricted due to high speeds and volume of traffic. The main function of a Controlled Access – Prohibited road is to move through traffic. All requests for changes to an existing access or for a new access on these roads require an amendment to the By-law. All remaining Regional Roads are included in Schedule “B” (Controlled Access – Regulated). The function of a Controlled Access – Regulated road is to move through traffic and provide access to adjacent lands. Typically, these roads are front-lotted with access available only to the Regional Road or are comparatively 41 41 August 22, 2017 Report: PDL-CPL-17-25

lower volume roads.

The subject property is located on Lackner Boulevard south of Zeller Drive in the City of Kitchener (please see Attachment 1). The subject property is owned by the City of Kitchener and currently functions as a stormwater management pond (SWM Pond #10) for the Idlewood Subdivision. Under the City of Kitchener’s Integrated Stormwater Master Plan, this facility has been identified as requiring re-habilitation and reconstruction in late summer/fall of 2017. Previously, a maintenance/trail connection from SWM Pond #10 to Lackner Boulevard was approved by Regional Council (PDL-CPL- 17-07) near the southerly limit of the property. This previously approved maintenance/trail will be located approximately 140 m south of Zeller Drive. To better accommodate re-construction and future maintenance operations at the northerly limit of the property, City of Kitchener staff has requested approval of a second maintenance access to Lackner Boulevard approximately 56 m south of Zeller Drive (please see Attachment 2). The second access would be paved in asphalt and gated at the property line to prevent regular vehicular access to the stormwater management pond.

As Lackner Boulevard is designated as a Controlled Access – Prohibited Road from Regional Road 55 (Victoria Street North) to Regional Road 53 (Fairway Road North) under the Region’s Controlled Access By-law #58-87, an amendment to this By-law would be required to permit the proposed maintenance access prior to the issuance of a Regional Road Access Permit by staff.

Region of Waterloo staff support the proposed maintenance access to Lackner Boulevard and recommend approval of the proposed amendment to Controlled Access By-law #58-87. The access would meet Region of Waterloo standards and would be gated and only used by maintenance vehicles for the stormwater management pond.

Area Municipal Consultation & Coordination:

The access design and location has been requested by City of Kitchener staff and they are in support of the proposed maintenance access to Lackner Boulevard.

Corporate Strategic Plan:

Managing access to the Regional Road system is integral to the development approval process and is represented in Focus Area 2: Sustainable Transportation: Optimize road capacity to safely manage traffic and congestion.

Financial Implications:

The City of Kitchener would be responsible for all costs associated with the construction of the maintenance access to Lackner Boulevard to Region of Waterloo standards.

2463348 Page 2 of 5

42 42 August 22, 2017 Report: PDL-CPL-17-25

Other Department Consultations/Concurrence:

Upon issuance of a Regional Road Access Permit, Transportation Engineering would issue a Regional Work Permit to allow works within the Regional right-of-way on Lackner Boulevard.

Attachments

Attachment 1 – Key Plan showing location of the property

Attachment 2 – Location of the proposed access to Lackner Boulevard and proposed amendment to Controlled Access By-law #58-87.

Prepared By: Jason Wigglesworth, Technician, Corridor Planning

Approved By: Rod Regier, Commissioner, Planning, Development and Legislative Services

2463348 Page 3 of 5

43 43 August 22, 2017 Report: PDL-CPL-17-25

Attachment 1

2463348 Page 4 of 5

44 44

August 22, 2017 Report: PDL-CPL-17-25

Attachment 2

45 45

Report: PDL-LEG-17-54 Region of Waterloo Planning Development and Legislative Services Legal Services

To: Chair Tom Galloway and Members of the Planning and Works Committee

Date: August 22, 2017 File Code: L07-90

Subject: Authorization to Expropriate Lands (1st Report) for the Reconfiguration of King Street North (Regional Road 15) – Uptown Streetscape Improvement Project, extending from the ION tracks south of Erb Street to Elgin Street (Project 6265), in the City of Waterloo

Recommendation:

That The Regional Municipality of Waterloo direct and authorize the Regional Solicitor to take the following actions with respect to the expropriation of lands for the proposed reconstruction of King Street (Regional Road 15 ), from the ION tracks south of Erb Street to Elgin Street, in the City of Waterloo in the Regional Municipality of Waterloo as detailed in report PDL-LEG-17-54 dated August 22, 2017;

1. Complete application(s) to the Council of The Regional Municipality of Waterloo, as may be required from time to time, for approval to expropriate land, which is required for the reconstruction and reconfiguration of King Street North (Regional Road No.15), extending from the ION tracks south of Erb Street to Elgin Street, in the City of Waterloo and described as follows:

Fee Simple Partial Taking:

i. Part of Lot 13 E/S King Street Plan 491, City of Waterloo, being Part 1 on 58R-19185 (Part of PIN 22374-0177 (LT)) (78 King Street North, City of Waterloo);

2. Serve notices of the above applications(s) required by the Expropriations Act (the “Act”);

2460281 46 46 August 22, 2017 Report: PDL-LEG-17-54

3. Forward to the Chief Inquiry Officer any requests for a hearing that may be received within the time prescribed by the Act;

4. Attend, with appropriate Regional staff, at any hearing that may be scheduled;

5. Discontinue expropriation proceedings or any part thereof, in respect of the above described lands, or any part thereof, upon the registration on title of the required documentation to complete a transaction whereby the required interests in the lands are conveyed or if otherwise deemed appropriate in the opinion of the Commissioner of Transportation and Environmental Services and the Regional Solicitor; and

6. Do all things necessary and proper to be done and report thereon to Regional Council in due course.

Summary:

NIL

Report:

On June 16, 2015, Planning and Works Committee approved a Municipal Class Environmental Assessment Study and Recommended Design Alternative for roadway improvements on King Street (Regional Road No. 15) in Uptown Waterloo, from the ION Tracks south of Erb Street, to University Avenue (Regional Road No. 57), as outlined in Report TES-DCS-15-13. The first phase of this project includes the reconstruction of King Street from Elgin Street to the ION Tracks located 100m south of Erb Street in the City of Waterloo, a total distance of approximately 650 metres. In addition, a section of Regional Road No. 9 (Erb Street) is being reconstructed as part of Phase I works from King Street to Caroline Street, a total distance of approximately 200 metres.

The work of this project will replace deteriorated infrastructure and provide Active Transportation enhancements along the King Street corridor in Uptown Waterloo, which will provide a critical link between Wilfrid Laurier University, residential developments and key destinations / attractions such as the Region’s Rapid Transit station, scheduled to be operational in 2018. The scope of work includes pavement, reconstruction and replacement of underground services to existing businesses and residential properties; modernization of traffic signals; installation of decorative street lights, transit stops, shelters and bus lay-bys; and streetscape construction including, new sidewalks and segregated bike lanes on both sides of the street. Part of the work of this project is being undertaken on behalf of the City of Waterloo (City), Waterloo North Hydro, Bell Canada and Rogers. The scope of work on behalf of others includes replacement of underground services; construction of electrical and communication duct-banks;

2460281 Page 2 of 8

47 47 August 22, 2017 Report: PDL-LEG-17-54

streetscape and landscaping improvements including, new street trees and underground soil planting cells.

Property acquisitions are required from adjacent property owners as part of this project to accommodate transit stop upgrades at the Bridgeport Road intersection and sidewalk improvements on the west side of King Street between Central Street and Ezra Street. In addition, the existing sidewalk currently encroaches onto private property at several locations along King Street between Erb Street and Elgin Street including the subject property. These strips of land are being acquired to formalize the road right-of-way and eliminate these sidewalk encroachments onto private property.

Land acquisition as outlined in the Recommendation is required from one (1) of these properties, being 78 King Street North, and it is for a fee simple partial taking for the purposes of installing, operating, repairing and maintaining a transit shelter and for public sidewalk reconfiguration and extension and associated works. The location of the subject property acquisition is illustrated on Schedule “A”.

It is noted that the implementation of the proposed improvements directly impacts a number of properties along King Street between Erb Street and Elgin Street; however, these properties are not included in this report since Regional staff have obtained from the majority of these property owners permission to enter in order to proceed with the construction of the proposed works. Regional staff will continue negotiations with property owners, as part of the Phase 1 of this Project, for the acquisition of the lands needed to formalize the road right-of-way and eliminate the existing sidewalk encroachments onto private property.

The affected property owner, or its representatives, has been contacted by Legal Services Real Estate staff by one or more of the following means: in-person meeting, telephone, written correspondence and/or e-mail to discuss the required acquisitions and have been informed of the Region’s intention to commence the expropriation process, including this Report going forward to ensure project time lines are met. The property owner has been provided with the Region’s expropriation Information sheet explaining the expropriation process. A copy of the Expropriation Information Sheet is attached as Appendix “B”. The owner has further been advised it is the Region’s intent to seek a negotiated settlement prior to completion of the Expropriation process and that the process has been commenced only to ensure possession of the required lands by the date set by Project staff in order to keep the project timeline in place.

Should a negotiated settlement be reached with the property owner and a conveyance of the required acquisition be completed before the expropriation process is complete, the expropriation process with respect to such lands would be discontinued by the Regional Solicitor.

2460281 Page 3 of 8

48 48 August 22, 2017 Report: PDL-LEG-17-54

The Region is acquiring the lands on an “as is” basis. Transportation and Environmental Services staff advise that the project budget has a substantial allocation to address existing impacted soils located generally in the Project area. The soil investigations that have been completed have not attributed the impacted soils to any one property and/or previous land use and therefore the risk is considered low in terms of incurring additional costs that have not already been anticipated in the project budget

Corporate Strategic Plan:

The Project supports the Region’s Corporate Strategic Plan in the Focus Areas of Growth Management and Prosperity: Manage growth to foster thriving and productive urban and rural communities and Sustainable Transportation: Develop greater, more sustainable and safe transportation choices.

Financial Implications:

The Region of Waterloo’s 2017 Ten Year Transportation Capital Program as amended by report COR-TRY-17-29 includes a budget of $5,988,00 in 2017 for RR15 (King St) Railway Tracks to Central (Project 06265) and RR9 (Erb Street) King Street to 100m east of Caroline Street /RR 9(Bridgeport Road/ Caroline Street, King Street to Erb Street (Project 06510) to be funded from Roads Rehabilitation Capital Reserve (90%, $5,398,000) and the Roads Development Charge Reserve Fund (10%, $590,000). This budget includes sufficient funds for the property acquisitions described in this report.

Other Department Consultations/Concurrence:

Transportation and Environmental Services staff have been consulted in the preparation of this Report.

Attachments

Appendix “A” - Map of subject lands

Appendix “B” – Copy of Expropriation Information Sheet

Prepared By: Fiona McCrea, Solicitor, Property

Approved By: Debra Arnold, Regional Solicitor, Director of Legal Services

2460281 Page 4 of 8

49 49 August 22, 2017 Report: PDL-LEG-17-54

Appendix “A”

2460281 Page 5 of 8

50 50 August 22, 2017 Report: PDL-LEG-17-54

Appendix “B”

The following information is provided as a general overview of the expropriation process and is not legal advice. For complete information, reference should be made to the Ontario Expropriations Act as well as the more detailed information in the Notices provided under that Act. Expropriation Information Sheet What is Expropriation? Governmental authorities such as municipalities, school boards, and the provincial and federal governments undertake many projects which require them to obtain land from private property owners. In the case of the Regional Municipality of Waterloo, projects such as the construction or improvement of Regional Roads sometimes require the purchase of land from private property owners. In many cases, the Region of Waterloo only needs a small portion of the private property owner’s lands or an easement for related purposes such as utilities, although in certain instances, entire properties are required. Usually the governmental authority is able to buy the land required for a project through a negotiated process with the affected property owners. Sometimes, however, the expropriation process must be used in order to ensure that the land is obtained within a specific timeline. Put simply, an expropriation is the transfer of lands or an easement to a governmental authority for reasonable compensation, including payment of fair market value for the transferred lands, without the consent of the property owner being required. In the case of expropriations by municipalities such as the Region of Waterloo, the process set out in the Ontario Expropriations Act must be followed to ensure that the rights of the property owners provided under that Act are protected.

IMPORTANT NOTE: The Region of Waterloo tries in all instances to obtain lands needed for its projects through a negotiated agreement on mutually acceptable terms. Sometimes, the Region of Waterloo will start the expropriation process while negotiations are underway. This dual approach is necessary to ensure that the Region of Waterloo will have possession of all of the lands needed to start a construction project on schedule. However, it is important to note that Regional staff continues to make every effort to reach a negotiated purchase of the required lands on mutually agreeable terms while the expropriation process is ongoing. If agreement is reached, expropriation proceedings can be discontinued and the land transferred to the Region of Waterloo in exchange for payment of the agreed-upon compensation.

2460281 Page 6 of 8

51 51 August 22, 2017 Report: PDL-LEG-17-54

What is the process of the Region of Waterloo under the Expropriations Act? • Regional Council considers a request to begin an application under the Expropriations Act to obtain land and/or an easement for a specific Regional project. No decision is made at this meeting to expropriate the land. This step is simply direction for the Region of Waterloo to provide a “Notice of Application for Approval to Expropriate” to affected property owners that the process has started to seek approval to expropriate the land.

• As stated in the Notice, affected property owners have 30 days to request a Hearing to consider whether the requested expropriation is “fair, sound and reasonably necessary in the achievement of the objectives” of the Region of Waterloo. This Hearing is conducted by a provincially-appointed Inquiry Officer. Prior to the Hearing, the Region of Waterloo must serve the property owner with a Notice setting out its reasons or grounds for the proposed expropriation. Compensation for lands is not determined at this Hearing. The Inquiry Officer can order the Region of Waterloo to pay the property owner up to $200.00 as compensation for the property owner’s costs in participating in this Hearing, regardless of the outcome of the Hearing.

• If a Hearing is held, a written report is provided by the Inquiry Officer to the property owner and the Region of Waterloo. Council must consider the Report within 90 days of receiving it. The Report is not binding on Council and Council may or may not accept the findings of the Report. After consideration of the Report, Council may or may not approve the expropriation of the land or grant approval with modifications. A property owner may wish to make written and/or verbal submissions to Council at the time that it is considering the Report.

• If no Hearing is requested by the property owner, then Council may approve the expropriation of the land after expiry of a 30 day period following service of the Notice of Application for Approval to Expropriate.

• If Council approves the expropriation then, within 3 months of this approval, the Region of Waterloo must register a Plan at the Land Registry Office that describes the expropriated lands. The registration of this Plan automatically transfers title of the lands to the Region of Waterloo, instead of by a Deed signed by the property owner.

• Within 30 days of registration of the Plan, the Region of Waterloo must serve a Notice of Expropriation on the affected property owner advising of the expropriation. Within 30 days of this Notice, the property owner may serve the Region of Waterloo with a Notice of Election selecting the valuation date under the Expropriations Act for calculation of the compensation.

• In order to obtain possession of the expropriated lands, the Region of Waterloo must also serve a Notice of Possession setting out the date that possession of the land is 2460281 Page 7 of 8

52 52 August 22, 2017 Report: PDL-LEG-17-54

required by the Region of Waterloo. This date has to be 3 months or more from the date that this Notice of Possession is served on the affected property owner.

• Within 3 months of registration of the Plan, the Region of Waterloo must provide the affected property owner with payment for the full amount of the appraised fair market value of the expropriated land or easement and a copy of the appraisal report on which the value is based. If the property owner disagrees with this amount, and/or claims other compensation and/or costs under the Expropriations Act, the compensation and/or costs matter may be referred to a provincially-appointed Board of Negotiation in an effort to reach a mediated settlement and/or an appeal may be made to the Ontario Municipal Board (OMB) for a decision. In any event, the Region of Waterloo continues in its efforts to reach a negotiated settlement with the affected property owner prior to the OMB making a decision.

2460281 Page 8 of 8

53 53

Report: PDL-LEG-17-56 Region of Waterloo Planning Development and Legislative Services Legal Services

To: Chair Tom Galloway and Members of the Planning and Works Committee

Date: August 22, 2017 File Code: L07-90

Subject: Approval to Expropriate Lands (2nd Report) for the Proposed Improvements to Ottawa Street South from Hwy 7 to Charles Street in the City of Kitchener (Phase One)

Recommendation:

That Council of The Regional Municipality of Waterloo approve the expropriation of lands for the purpose of the improvements to Ottawa Street (Regional Road 4) from the Highway 7 Westbound Ramp to 250 Metres West of Charles Street, in the City of Kitchener, in The Regional Municipality of Waterloo as detailed in Report PDL-LEG-17- 56 dated August 22nd, 2017, described as follows:

Fee Simple Full Taking:

i. Lot 21, Registered Plan 262 and Part Lot 22 Registered Plan 262 save and except Part 12 on WR769305, all of PIN 22506-0249(LT)(22 Ottawa Street South, Kitchener); ii. Part Lot 22, Registered Plan 262 as in 658294, all of PIN 22506-0078(LT)(14 Ottawa Street South, Kitchener); iii. Lots 20, 31, 32 & 33, Registered Plan 262 and Part Park Lot 25 Plan 404 and Part Lot 54 Streets and Lanes as in 564486 & 1410660 save and except Part 15 on 58R-17395, all of PIN 22506-0227(LT)(1081 King Street East South, Kitchener);

Fee Simple Partial Taking:

iv. Part of Lot 170 & 171, Registered Plan 299, being Part 1 on Reference Plan 58R- 19709, part of PIN 22520-0060 (LT) (168 Ottawa Street North, Kitchener); v. Part of Lot 172, Registered Plan 299, being Part 2 on Reference Plan 58R-

2463570 Page 1 of 9

54 54 August 22, 2017 Report: PDL-LEG-17-56

19709, part of PIN 22520-0061(LT) (172 Ottawa Street North, Kitchener); vi. Part of Lots 187 & 188, Registered Plan 299, being Part 3 on Reference Plan 58R-19709, part of PIN 22520-0194(LT) (184 Ottawa Street North, Kitchener); vii. Part of Lots 188 & 189, Registered Plan 299, being Part 4 on Reference Plan 58R-19709, part of PIN 22520-0072(LT) (188 Ottawa Street North, Kitchener); viii. Part of Lots 189 & 190, Registered Plan 299, being Part 5 on Reference Plan 58R-19709, part of PIN 22520-0073(LT) (194 Ottawa Street North, Kitchener); ix. Part of Lot 1, Registered Plan 650, being Part 6 on Reference Plan 58R-19709, part of PIN 22520-0074(LT) (198 Ottawa Street North, Kitchener); x. Part of Lot 2, Registered Plan 650, being Part 7 on Reference Plan 58R-19709, part of PIN 22520-0075(LT) (206 Ottawa Street North, Kitchener); xi. Part of Lot 5, Registered Plan 650, being Part 9 on Reference Plan 58R-19709, part of PIN 22520-0076(LT) (226 Ottawa Street North, Kitchener); xii. Part of Lot 6, Registered Plan 650, being Part 10 on Reference Plan 58R-19709, part of PIN 22520-0077(LT) (234 Ottawa Street North, Kitchener); xiii. Part of Lot 7, Registered Plan 650, being Part 11 on Reference Plan 58R-19709, part of PIN 22520-0078(LT) (240 Ottawa Street North, Kitchener); xiv. Part of Lot 8, Registered Plan 650, being Part 12 on Reference Plan 58R-19709, part of PIN 22520-0079(LT) (248 Ottawa Street North, Kitchener); xv. Part of Lot 39, Registered Plan 651, being Part 13 on Reference Plan 58R- 19709, part of PIN 22569-0013(LT) (257 Ottawa Street North, Kitchener); xvi. Part of Lot 38, Registered Plan 651, being Part 14 on Reference Plan 58R- 19709, part of PIN 22569-0014(LT) (251 Ottawa Street North, Kitchener); xvii. Part of Lot 37, Registered Plan 651, being Parts 15 and 16 on Reference Plan 58R-19709, part of PIN 22569-0015(LT) (245 Ottawa Street North, Kitchener); xviii. Part of Lot 36, Registered Plan 651, being Parts 17 and 18 on Reference Plan 58R-19709, part of PIN 22569-0016(LT) (239 Ottawa Street North, Kitchener); xix. Part of Lot 35, Registered Plan 651, being Part 19 on Reference Plan 58R-19709, part of PIN 22569-0017(LT) (231 Ottawa Street North, Kitchener); xx. Part of Lot 34, Registered Plan 651, being Part 20 on Reference Plan 58R-19709, part of PIN 22569-0018(LT) (225 Ottawa Street North, Kitchener); xxi. Part of Lot 33, Registered Plan 651, being Part 21 on Reference Plan 58R-19709, part of PIN 22569-0019(LT) (221 Ottawa Street North, Kitchener); xxii. Part of Lot 32, Registered Plan 651, being Part 22 on Reference Plan 58R-19709, part of PIN 22569-0020(LT) (215 Ottawa Street North, Kitchener); xxiii. Part of Lot 31, Registered Plan 651, being Part 23 on Reference Plan 58R-19709, part of PIN 22569-0021(LT) (209 Ottawa Street North, Kitchener); xxiv. Part of Lot 30, Registered Plan 651, being Part 24 on Reference Plan 58R-19709, part of PIN 22569-0022(LT) (203 Ottawa Street North, Kitchener); xxv. Part of Lot 17, Registered Plan 651, being Part 26 on Reference Plan 58R-19709, part of PIN 22569-0024(LT) (70 Mackenzie Ave., Kitchener); xxvi. Part Lot 3, Registered Plan 651, being Part 27 on Reference Plan 58R-19709,

2463570 Page 2 of 9

55 55 August 22, 2017 Report: PDL-LEG-17-56

part of PIN 22577-0130(LT) (167 Ottawa Street North, Kitchener); xxvii. Part Lot 2, Registered Plan 651, being Part 28 on Reference Plan 58R-19709, part of PIN 22577-0129(LT) (165 Ottawa Street North, Kitchener); xxviii. Part Lot 1, Registered Plan 651, being Part 29 on Reference Plan 58R-19709, part of PIN 22577-0128(LT) (163 Ottawa Street North, Kitchener).

And that staff be instructed to register a Plan of Expropriation for the property within three months of the granting of the approval to expropriate the property, as required by the Expropriations Act;

And that the registered owners be served with a Notice of Expropriation and a Notice of Possession for the property after the registration of the Plan of Expropriation and the Regional Solicitor is authorized to take any and all actions required to enforce such Notices including but not limited to any application pursuant to Section 40 of the Expropriations Act;

And that the Regional Solicitor is authorized to enter into an agreement with the registered owners, or to make an application under Section 39 of the Expropriations Act, to adjust the date for possession specified in the Notice of Possession as may be required; And that all above-referenced fee simple partial takings situated adjacent to an existing Regional public highway be acquired for road widening purposes and therefore be deemed to form part of the adjacent public highway in accordance with subsection 31(6) of the Municipal Act, 2001; And that if no agreement as to compensation is made with an owner, the statutory Offer of Compensation and payment be served upon the registered owners of the property in the amount of the market value of the interests in the land as estimated by the Region’s appraiser in accordance with the Expropriations Act;

And that the Regional Solicitor be authorized to execute any Indemnity agreement or other document related to payment of the statutory Offer of Compensation;

And further that the Regional Solicitor be authorized to discontinue expropriation proceedings or any part thereof, in respect of the above described lands, or any part thereof, upon the registration on title of the required documentation to complete the transaction or if determined by the Commissioner of Transportation and Environmental Services that such lands, or any part or interest thereof, are not required for the subject Project.

Summary: NIL

2463570 Page 3 of 9

56 56 August 22, 2017 Report: PDL-LEG-17-56

Report:

Regional Council approved the proposed improvements to Ottawa Street South on November 4th, 2015 as outlined in Report TES-DCS-15-25.

Since that time, Transportation and Environmental Services staff has determined that construction would proceed in two phases. This report, PDL-LEG-17-56, relates to the property requirements for Phase One.

Phase One includes improvements on both sides of Ottawa Street from Highway 7 to Weber Street and three (3) full takings located along the North side of Ottawa Street North between King Street East and Charles Street East. Twenty-nine (29) properties on Ottawa Street are directly impacted as shown in Appendix “A” to this report. Fee simple partial takings are required from twenty-six (26) properties. Due to the location and extent of the impacts to the three (3) properties known as 1081 King Street East, 22 Ottawa Street South, and 14 Ottawa Street South, a full buy-out of each of the three (3) properties is required. The full takings are included in Phase One to provide as much time as possible for the owners to relocate and/or purchase a new property.

A separate report to request authorization to expropriate the properties required in Phase Two will follow shortly.

The improvements in Phase One and Phase Two include the following:

• Full reconstruction of the existing roadway;

• Widening of Ottawa Street from east of King Street to west of Charles Street;

• Turn lane improvements at Weber Street, King Street and Charles Street;

• Construction of 1.50 metre wide segregated cycling lanes on both sides of the road to provide a continuous cycling facility on Ottawa Street from the Highway 7 westbound ramp to Charles Street;

• Construction of a 3.0m wide off-road multi-use trail on the north side of Ottawa Street from Charles Street westerly to connect to the Iron Horse Trail at Nyberg Street.

• Construction of new 1.5 metre sidewalks on the south side of Ottawa Street and 1.80 metre sidewalks on the north side of Ottawa Street; and

• Replacement of the watermains, storm sewer and sanitary sewer systems and services throughout the project limits. It is noted that two of the impacted properties are owned by the City of Kitchener, and therefore not subject to expropriation. Region staff have been in contact with City staff regarding the requirements for partial takings. Negotiations are underway and a

2463570 Page 4 of 9

57 57 August 22, 2017 Report: PDL-LEG-17-56

negotiated agreement is expected.

The negotiated acquisition of one (1) of the required properties has been completed and thus the property has not been included in the request for approval to expropriate in this report. Further, negotiated acquisitions have been reached with owners of nineteen (19) of the required properties however as the completion dates are still pending these properties are included in this report. Any transactions not completed prior to the registration of the Plan of Expropriation will be deemed to be settlements of the expropriation of such lands.

Council approved the commencement of expropriation of the subject properties on May 16, 2017 as detailed in report PDL-LEG-17-35. The appropriate forms under the Expropriations Act were served on or about June 9th, 2017 in order to initiate formal proceedings under the Act for these properties. All of the affected property owners were previously contacted by Legal Services staff and informed of the project as well as the Region’s intention to commence the expropriation process and the Region’s Expropriation Information Sheet was provided to each of them. The affected property owners have also been provided with offers to purchase. Legal Services staff contacted all property owners and informed them of the Region’s intention to continue with the expropriation process in order to ensure that the construction timeline is maintained, including this report being presented to Council, as detailed in the Region’s Expropriation Information Sheet.

Council approval of the expropriations is being sought at this time to permit registration of the Plans of Expropriation this year and possession of the required lands and interests in the spring of 2018 so that the majority of the utility relocations and building demolitions can be completed before the 2019 and 2020 construction seasons which will facilitate the overall construction time line. Legal Services staff has been negotiating property acquisitions over the past several months and intends to continue negotiations with property owners in an effort to achieve settlements of their claims under the Expropriations Act.

Upon Council approval of the expropriation of the properties, such approval will be endorsed upon on a certificate of approval on the Plan of Expropriation for those properties not acquired under agreement. The Plan will then be registered within three months of the approval. Ownership of the property vests with the Region upon the registration of the Plan. Notices of Expropriation and Notices of Possession are then served upon all registered owners, including tenants as shown on the assessment roll. The Region will take possession of the required lands at least 3 months after service of the Notice of Possession.

After the registration of the Plans of Expropriation and prior to the taking of possession of the property, the expropriating authority is required to serve the registered owners

2463570 Page 5 of 9

58 58 August 22, 2017 Report: PDL-LEG-17-56

with an offer in full compensation for their interests in the land. The offer must be accompanied by the immediate payment of one hundred (100%) of the appraised market value of the land to the registered owners as estimated by the Region’s appraiser. The registered owners are also to be served with a report appraising the market value of the property, which report formed the basis for the offer of compensation.

The expropriation process is proceeding to ensure that the Region has possession of the land for advanced utility relocations and building demolitions in 2018 and the commencement of construction at these locations in 2019 and 2020.

The expropriation of the lands is on an “as is” basis and upon closing, the Region assumes all responsibility for the lands.

The subject lands are shown attached as Appendix “A”. A list of the corporate owners of the fee simple interest in the subject lands is attached as Appendix “B”. Regional staff have conducted corporate profile searches of affected corporate property owners and the directors and officers are listed for each in Appendix “B”. This list does not include tenants, easement holders or holders of security interests in the subject lands.

Corporate Strategic Plan:

This project is consistent with the development of Strategic Focus Area 2 (Growth Management and Prosperity). This project specifically addresses Strategic Objective 2.2:

• Develop, optimize and maintain infrastructure to meet current and projected needs.

It is also consistent with the development of Strategic Focus Area 3 (Sustainable Transportation), specifically Strategic Objective 3.2:

• Develop, promote and integrate active forms of transportation (cycling and walking).

Financial Implications:

The Region’s approved 2017 Transportation Capital Program as amended by report PDL-LEG-17-52 includes a budget of $1,930,000 in 2017, $1,265,000 in 2018-2020 for RR4 Ottawa Street North from the Highway 7 Westbound Ramp to Weber Street South (Project 05163) to be funded from the Roads Rehabilitation Capital Reserve (87%; $2,775,000) and from the Roads Regional Development Charges Reserve Fund (13%, $420,000). The Region’s approved 2017 Transportation Capital Program includes a budget of $120,000 in 2017, $7,860,000 in 2018-2021 for RR4 Ottawa Street King Street to Charles Street (Project 07332) to be funded from the the Roads Regional Development Charges Reserve Fund (85%; $6,783,000) and from the Roads Capital Levy Reserve (15%, $1,197,000).

2463570 Page 6 of 9

59 59 August 22, 2017 Report: PDL-LEG-17-56

Other Department Consultations/Concurrence:

Transportation and Environmental Services and Financial Services staff have been consulted in the preparation of this Report.

Attachments

Appendix “A” – Sketch of Project Area and Subject Properties Appendix “B” – Corporate Profiles

Prepared By: Fiona McCrea, Solicitor, Property

Approved By: Debra Arnold, Regional Solicitor, Director of Legal Services

2463570 Page 7 of 9

60 60 August 22, 2017 Report: PDL-LEG-17-56

Appendix “A”

2463570 Page 8 of 9

61 61 August 22, 2017 Report: PDL-LEG-17-56

Appendix “B” – Corporate Profiles

1. Address: 22 Ottawa Street South., Kitchener, ON Owner: 1427695 Ontario Ltd. Annual Return: 2016/11/23 Directors/Officers: Thomas Wayne Ferguson, Tom Wayne Ferguson

2. Address: 198 Ottawa Street North., Kitchener, ON Owner: Forward Urban Inc. Annual Return: 2015/10/27 Directors/Officers: J.J. Malfara

3. Address: 1081 King Street East., Kitchener, ON Owner: Ray of Hope Inc. Annual Return: 2016/12/07 Directors/Officers: Marlene Brubacher, Carl E. Hartwig, Marlies Hoffman, Theodore T. LaRiviere, Sandra MacGillivray, Gerry N. Martin, Shawn A. Matches, Dan Murray, Dave Roach, Michelle Scott, Tiffany Svensson, Wm. Harry Whyte, Dan Wideman, Douglas Witmer, Deborah Woodhall

2463570 Page 9 of 9

62 62

Report: TES-TRS-17-17

Region of Waterloo

Transportation and Environmental Services

Transit Development

To: Chair Tom Galloway and Members of the Planning and Works Committee

Date: August 22, 2017 File Code: D10-70

Subject: Proposed Transportation Demand Management Program Plan: 2017- 2021

Recommendation:

That the Regional Municipality of Waterloo approve the Transportation Demand Management Program Plan for 2017-2021, as described in report TES-TRS-17-17, dated August 22, 2017, with the implementation of the plan subject to Regional Council’s annual budget deliberations.

Summary:

Transportation Demand Management (TDM) is best described as the use of policies, targeted programs, incentives, and supportive infrastructure to encourage shifting travel behaviour away from driving alone.

The Region of Waterloo has been a leader in TDM through its establishment of supportive policy in the Regional Official Plan and implementation of initiatives in collaboration with Area Municipalities, workplaces, and other community partners. Over the past decade, the Region’s TDM Program has evolved into a set of policies, programs, and partnerships that can help optimize the transportation network, promote transportation choice, and support sustainable development.

The proposed TDM Program Plan (Attachment 1) presents the strategic direction and recommended projects for the TDM Program for 2017-2021. Mirroring the timeframe of the Grand River Transit (GRT) Business Plan, the TDM Program Plan builds on the TDM-supportive recommendations identified by GRT to help achieve the ridership targets and sustainable transportation goals of the Regional Transportation Master 2425798 Page 1 of 13 63 63 August 22, 2017 Report: TES-TRS-17-17

Plan. This plan also builds upon previous TDM Program plans, and uses the successes and lessons learned to identify and prioritize activities to 2021.

The following plan serves as a guide, and is intended be responsive to opportunities presented by other Regional departments, municipal partners, and stakeholders. Where possible, the proposed plan identifies additional budget resources required for known and planned activities that will help achieve TDM Program Goals.

Ultimately, the proposed plan serves as an amendable work plan for the TDM Program from 2017-2021 that:

• Establishes strategic goals for the TDM Program; • Outlines an implementation timeline to meet TDM goals; • Defines roles for staff and partners; and • Estimates funding needs above the current (2017) approved TDM and TravelWise Transportation Management Association (TMA) Program budgets. Staff recommend that Regional Council approve the proposed TDM Program Plan to help make sustainable transportation the preferred choice for those who live, work, and play within Waterloo Region.

Report:

Provincial and Regional policies recognize the importance of TDM in developing and encouraging the use of a well-connected and sustainable transportation network. These policies have served to guide the development of the Region’s TDM Program. The Region of Waterloo has been a leader in TDM through its introduction of supportive policy in the Regional Official Plan and implementation of activities in collaboration with Area Municipalities, workplaces, and other community partners. TDM Program initiatives aim to shift current travel behaviour in order to meet the goals of the Regional Transportation Master Plan (RTMP), including optimizing the transportation network, promoting transportation choice, and supporting sustainable development.

This proposed plan presents the Region of Waterloo with strategic direction, scoping, and recommended projects for the TDM Program for 2017-2021. The plan continues to build upon previous TDM plans and uses the successes and lessons learned to identify and prioritize TDM Program activities to 2021.

Strategic Direction

The following Vision, Focus Areas, and Goals were developed to reflect both established best practices, as well as existing TDM Program activities, and will provide guidance in the implementation and monitoring of the 2017-2021 TDM Program Plan.

2425798 Page 2 of 13 64 64 August 22, 2017 Report: TES-TRS-17-17

TDM Program Vision

“The Region of Waterloo TDM Program will work with employers, residents, and other stakeholders in the community to reduce single occupancy vehicle use and meet 2031 trip targets for transit and active transportation modes.”

This vision is intended to achieve the desired sustainable transportation outcomes stated in the 2031 Regional Transportation Master Plan, while also recognizing the importance of collaboration to achieve the desired results and remain fiscally viable.

Focus Areas

• Land Use and Transportation Integration o Leverage the relationship between land use and transportation planning to develop and support transit- and TDM-supportive policies and programs. • Transportation Supply o Delivery of, and improvements to, public transportation and active transportation infrastructure, resources and services. • Education, Promotion, and Outreach o Public awareness of existing and emerging tools and resources that enable commuters and residents to make more sustainable transportation choices. • Travel Behaviour Incentives and Disincentives o Influence individual travel behaviour through price and time-based signals (e.g., coordinated parking pricing policies in station areas, promotional event incentives).

The four Focus Areas above were defined from the 2009 TravelWise Review, 2011 Regional Transportation Master Plan, and 2015 Metrolinx TDM Background Paper, and help provide continuity within the program. They can also be considered the “pillars” of the TDM Program as TDM measures typically seek to influence one or more of these focus areas. These pillars shaped how the more specific goals will be achieved through the implementation of TDM initiatives described below.

TDM Program Goals and Proposed Initiatives

The following eight goals serve to outline the actions required to realize the TDM Program Vision through the implementation of key TDM projects and initiatives over the life of the plan. This approach provides accountability, while allowing the program to adapt with the evolving TDM landscape.

The goals below are presented in no particular order; however the Project Implementation Timeline appended to the full plan provides a proposed implementation schedule that identifies priority projects. 2425798 Page 3 of 13 65 65 August 22, 2017 Report: TES-TRS-17-17

Ultimately, the proposed TDM Plan serves as an amendable 2017-2021 work plan for the TDM Program to help make sustainable transportation options the preferred choice for those who live, work, and play within Waterloo Region.

1. Enhance Program Integration and Coordination.

Continue to align TDM programs and services with existing policies while refining program direction to maximize resources.

Ongoing TDM Program Initiatives:

• Continue to partner with Area Municipalities and other stakeholders to coordinate, plan, and promote local TDM initiatives through groups such as the Inter-Municipal Partnership for Active Transportation (IMPAcT)

Proposed TDM Program Initiatives:

• Participate in Area Municipalities' station area and active transportation planning processes o Identify opportunities to collaborate with Area Municipalities in ongoing Station Area Planning to champion transit-supportive active transportation improvements and parking policies that foster intensified development o Promote the provision of electric vehicle charging stations, commuter carpool parking lots, and park and ride opportunities where appropriate

2. Continue Investing in the TravelWise Transportation Management Association.

Explore opportunities to expand services for existing TravelWise Transportation Management Association (TMA) members that provide further incentives and offer greater choice in travel to employees, while promoting membership to organizations located in areas surrounding new and existing transit services.

Ongoing TDM Program Initiatives:

• Secure annual dedicated funding and program service agreements for TravelWise (2017-2021) • Targeted TravelWise promotion and membership drive along ION and iXpress corridors

Proposed TDM Program Initiatives:

• Establish and monitor TravelWise TMA-wide mode split target • Explore opportunities to partner with local organizations to expand/deliver services to TravelWise members (e.g., bikeshare, carshare, rideshare, electric vehicles for carpoolers, etc.)

2425798 Page 4 of 13 66 66 August 22, 2017 Report: TES-TRS-17-17

3. Enhance TDM’s Involvement in Development Application and Review Process.

Support the Region and Area Municipalities’ inclusion of TDM principles in station area planning and development application processes, and encourage developer participation in the TravelWise TMA.

Ongoing TDM Program Initiatives:

• Review and comment on development applications as received • Coordinate with Area Municipalities on TDM Checklists for consistency in implementation and update as needed

Proposed TDM Program Initiatives:

• Update the TDM Checklist and Parking Reduction Worksheet in the Transportation Impact Study Guidelines to include a reference guide and monitoring plan for applicants • Encourage TravelWise Developer category membership for new developments o Follow up with development applicants regarding TDM Checklist implementation o Targeted promotion of Developer category o Respond to developer inquiries, host Q&A session(s) (if required) • Comment on future active transportation and/or transit-supportive amendments to the Development Charges Act as opportunities arise

4. Develop and Support Residential and School-based TDM Program(s).

Offer a suite of services and TDM planning tools and objectives for residential neighbourhoods and school-based audiences (TravelWise@Home, TravelWise@School).

Ongoing TDM Program Initiatives:

• Collaborate with the local School Travel Planner to support and promote community and school-based sustainable transportation initiatives

Proposed TDM Program Initiatives:

• Offer TravelWise services for staff, and selected services for students, at schools engaged in school travel planning (TravelWise@School) o Collaborate with School Travel Planner to identify and support member schools o Seek school board endorsement and TravelWise@Work membership for board headquarters’ employees

2425798 Page 5 of 13 67 67 August 22, 2017 Report: TES-TRS-17-17

o Explore utilizing school catchment areas for scoping/targeting residents for promotional campaigns • Pilot TravelWise services and planning tools for select high-density residential developments (TravelWise@Home) o Determine feasibility of TravelWise membership for select residential developments o Link to alternative transit services for challenging to serve neighbourhoods, and consider high-density residential pilot sites in both urban and rural communities • Support future Conestoga College U-pass with TravelWise@Work membership and services for College employees, and selected services for students (e.g., carpool matching network for out-of-town commuter students) • Support the expansion of school-based cycling training throughout Waterloo Region (e.g., Cycling into the Future)

5. Develop Comprehensive Performance Monitoring for TDM Program.

Provide tangible annual indicators of program activities and monitor uptake of commuter services.

Ongoing TDM Program Initiatives:

• Monitor annual performance indicators for TravelWise

Proposed TDM Program Initiatives:

• Monitor development applications with completed TDM Checklists • Develop active transportation monitoring network in collaboration with Area Municipalities o Collaborate with Area Municipalities to share and exchange active transportation network usage data (e.g., pedestrian/cyclist count data) o Seek policy updates to include pedestrian/cyclist counters as part of design and construction guidelines • Work with external commuter/TDM service providers to share and monitor performance (e.g., carshare, bikeshare, rideshare, Metrolinx) • Assess opportunities to build queries for EasyGO Electronic Fare Card System data • Monitor/review implementation of TDM Program Plan initiatives • Use evaluation data collected from TDM and active transportation initiatives, and external data (e.g., Statistics Canada, Transportation Tomorrow Survey, etc.) to inform TDM planning and program development

2425798 Page 6 of 13 68 68 August 22, 2017 Report: TES-TRS-17-17

6. Enhance Internal TDM Support for Regional Employees.

Increase and improve commuter options and services to enable Regional staff to lead by example. The TDM Program continues to act as the workplace champion and staff liaison for the internal TravelWise program.

Ongoing TDM Program Initiatives:

• Continue to manage internal TravelWise Program and Regional employee initiatives o Coordinate and deliver TMA services for Regional employees and act as point of contact for staff requests (e.g., CarShare, Emergency Ride Home claims, carpool matching/parking, GRT passes, bike rack requests, etc.) o Host information sessions as requested and regularly circulate program updates

Proposed TDM Program Initiatives:

• Gain political support for, and monitor Regional commuter drive alone reduction target and action plan • Seek opportunities to increase/improve commuter options and services for Regional staff (e.g., enhance carpool parking program, expand carsharing, and connect employees to local bikeshare)

7. Invest in Strategic Community Outreach.

Provide mode-specific, relevant messaging that informs and educates residents, to foster travel behaviour change.

Ongoing TDM Program Initiatives:

• Continue to develop and implement targeted, mode-specific TDM communications, promotions, and resources in coordination with Area Municipalities o Share Area Municipalities’ construction mitigation strategies for active transportation with one another and Regional departments o Participate in the development of a revised edition of the regional cycling map and monitor feedback o Develop a coordinated communications strategy with Area Municipalities for TDM-related promotion, education, and outreach campaigns o Host bi-annual local active transportation summit (e.g., BikeWR Cycling Summit) o Align events with other transportation-themed or TravelWise-relevant events whenever possible (e.g., Bike Month, Transit Month)

2425798 Page 7 of 13 69 69 August 22, 2017 Report: TES-TRS-17-17

Proposed TDM Program Initiatives:

• Promote residential access to transit along ION and iXpress corridors through customized travel plans to stations/stops, and provide information about the integration of ION and GRT o Develop custom, neighbourhood-based station/stop travel plans, particularly for areas with ION and iXpress service o Target students, especially first year students, new/recently moved residents, high density residential units, large/new employers, older adults, and/or residents with disabilities • Work in collaboration with GRT Communications and Marketing on activities/campaigns related to travel behaviour change o Update, organize, and integrate sustainable transportation information and programs on the Region’s webpages and www.GoTravelWise.ca for residents and visitors o Participate in the planning and implementation of the ION awareness and service launch campaigns o Participate in the planning and implementation of GRT’s Travel Mode Shift Campaign (e.g., "Why GRT?")

8. Support the Delivery of Transportation Network Improvements.

Leverage and promote strategic improvements to the transportation network that increase the competitiveness of sustainable modes of transportation.

Ongoing TDM Program Initiatives:

• Support the integration and promotion of intercity transportation (e.g., wayfinding harmonization, commuter carpool opportunities, GO service expansion)

Proposed TDM Program Initiatives:

• Launch an integrated mobility working group in collaboration with Transit Development, Rapid Transit, Transportation Planning, and Area Municipalities to facilitate the coordinated planning and implementation of cross-jurisdictional projects that can enhance multi-modal network integration • Work with the local bikeshare and Area Municipalities to support integration of bikeshare and transit • Prioritize and align active transportation winter network and maintenance standards in coordination with Area Municipalities • Seek opportunities to enhance access to transit, transit alternatives, and active transportation for challenging to serve areas, low income groups, and/or disadvantaged communities

2425798 Page 8 of 13 70 70 August 22, 2017 Report: TES-TRS-17-17

• Creation/integration of a TDM Community Fund to support cross-jurisdictional projects and offer micro-grants to TDM-supportive community projects (similar to the Region’s Community Environmental Fund)

Corporate Strategic Plan:

The proposed TDM Program Plan contributes to the following 2015-2018 Strategic Objectives:

• 2.1. Create a public transportation network that is integrated, accessible, affordable and sustainable. o 2.1.4. Develop and implement programs to educate and improve awareness of availability and benefits of transportation choices and options. • 2.3. Build infrastructure for, and increase participation in, active forms of transportation (cycling and walking). o 2.3.2. Collaborate with community partners to facilitate actions to encourage active and safe routes to school. • 2.4. Optimize road capacity to safely manage traffic and congestion. o 2.4.1. Enhance and implement safety awareness and education programs for drivers, cyclists, and pedestrians.

The Region’s TDM Program is a mechanism to implement the following policies outlined in Section 3.C (Transportation Demand Management) of the Regional Official Plan:

• 3.C.1. The Region, in collaboration with the Area Municipalities, will implement a comprehensive Transportation Demand Management Program as part of its efforts to reduce automobile dependency […] The Transportation Demand Management program will include, but not limited to: a) Community-wide and area-specific Transportation Demand Management programs; b) Employer Transportation Demand Management programs that support and enhance sustainable transportation choices to public and private sector employees and major institutions for such actions as walking, cycling, transit, carpooling, car sharing, teleworking, shuttle buses and ride-sharing programs, bicycle storage facilities and showers; and c) Increasing transportation system efficiency by encouraging van and carpooling, preferential parking for car and van pools, shared parking, bicycle parking facilities, indoor bus waiting areas, queue-jumping lanes for transit buses, smart cards and high-occupancy vehicle lanes. • 3.C.2. The Region will operate a commuter options program for Regional employees that supports and enhances sustainable transportation options for such actions as walking, cycling, transit, carpooling, car sharing, shuttle buses

2425798 Page 9 of 13 71 71 August 22, 2017 Report: TES-TRS-17-17

and ridesharing programs, bicycle storage facilities and showers. Sustainable transportation options will also be supported and enhanced for commuter and business travel. • 3.C.3. Where an owner/applicant agrees to implement, and can appropriately secure, the TDM strategies recommended in a Transportation Impact Study […] the Region may consider granting reductions in the level of road improvement that would otherwise be required to support the development. • 3.C.4. Area Municipalities are encouraged to provide reduced parking standards for development applications where the owner/applicant agrees to incorporate TDM strategies as part of the proposed development.

Financial Implications:

Some proposed projects are anticipated to require additional funding beyond the current TDM Program and TravelWise TMA Program budgets. However, in consideration of potential partner involvement, known and anticipated funding opportunities, and the need for additional scoping, proposed projects requiring additional funding will be presented to senior management on a project-by-project basis. Ultimately, implementation of the plan will be subject to Regional Council’s annual budget deliberations.

The estimated program budget impact of the proposed TDM Plan and initiatives described above are summarized in the two tables below and detailed in the financial section of the full plan (Attachment 1).

The TDM Program Budget (Table 1) is dedicated for staffing, community-wide initiatives, and Regional employee programming and supports. The approved 2017 TDM Program Budget consists of staffing costs for 2.0 FTE Principal Planners, carpool software licensing fees, and an additional transit incentive for Regional employees without a parking pass. Projected TDM Program cost increases are primarily dedicated to the introduction of the proposed neighbourhood-based transit access and travel planning initiative, annual Regional contribution to school-based bicycle training programming, and a cost-matching TDM community fund.

Table 1. TDM Program Budget Summary, 2017-2021

2017 Budget Estimated Budget Needs (2018-2021) Description (Approved) 2018 2019 2020 2021

TDM Program Costs $253,847 $283,311 $301,002 $309,740 $318,527

2425798 Page 10 of 13 72 72 August 22, 2017 Report: TES-TRS-17-17

The TravelWise TMA budget has been separated to make it easier to track the costs associated with running the TravelWise workplace program and proposed TravelWise@School and TravelWise@Home programs (Table 2). In past years, TravelWise was partially funded from Transport Canada’s ecoMOBILITY program. This historical funding source was expected to be exhausted in 2016, leaving an anticipated funding shortfall of $77,000 in 2017, which was requested in a Budget Issue Paper. During the 2017 budget deliberations, 50 per cent of the requested funding ($38,500) was approved by Regional Council. Staff identified short-term cost saving measures (e.g., reduced program and events budgets for employee travel behaviour surveys, employer recognition, and community-wide promotions, cost-savings from other initiatives, etc.) to deliver the TravelWise program through Sustainable Waterloo Region without negatively impacting services to members in 2017.

However, these short-term measures are not sustainable to meet the current TravelWise program’s ongoing funding needs to retain a third party for program coordination and maintain employee services beyond 2017. Continued underfunding would similarly prevent the introduction of the proposed TravelWise@Home and TravelWise@School programs.

The 2018-2021 budget projection described in Table 2 estimates the costs associated with phasing in the remaining funding required to fully replace the exhausted ecoMOBILITY grant, introduce the TravelWise@Home and TravelWise@School programs, and continue to retain the services of a third party like Sustainable Waterloo Region for frontline service delivery to all TravelWise TMA members. Based on work plan estimates, it is anticipated that additional third-party resources (i.e., 0.5 FTE Program Coordinator) will be required when TravelWise exceeds 40 members (estimated 2020).

Projected TravelWise TMA Membership figures are for the end of each year and include membership estimates for the proposed TravelWise@Home and TravelWise@School programs.

2425798 Page 11 of 13 73 73 August 22, 2017 Report: TES-TRS-17-17

Table 2. TravelWise TMA Program Budget Summary, 2017-2021

Estimated Budget Needs (2018-2021) and 2017 Budget Description Projected TravelWise TMA Membership (Approved) 2018 2019 2020 2021

TravelWise TMA ($45,000) ($52,457) ($54,807) ($57,144) ($59,470) Program Revenue TravelWise TMA Program Operating $115,500 $170,550 $173,050 $205,563 $208,388 Costs $70,500 $118,093* $118,243 $148,419** $148,918 Net TravelWise TMA

Program Costs and 28 33 37 41 45 Membership Members Members Members Members Members

*Includes estimated costs to fully replace the exhausted ecoMOBILITY grant and restore program budgets for employee travel behaviour surveys, employer recognition, TMA-wide promotions, and new member outreach, as well as introduce and promote the TravelWise@Home and TravelWise@School programs.

**Includes estimated increase in third-party service delivery costs associated with projected TravelWise membership growth beyond 40 members.

Other Department Consultations/Concurrence:

Transit Services, Transportation Planning, Area Municipal staff representatives participating on the Inter-Municipal Partnership for Active Transportation, and other stakeholders (e.g., Active and Safe Routes to School, current TravelWise TMA member organizations, etc.) were consulted in the development of the TDM Program Plan’s proposed strategic direction and initiatives.

The proposed TDM Program Plan and transit-supportive initiatives described above are in concurrence with the TDM recommendations outlined in the GRT Business Plan for 2017-2021.

If approved, the proposed TDM Program Plan will be used to inform and support strategies for Moving Forward, the Region’s Transportation Master Plan Update.

A previous draft of the TDM Program Plan was presented to the Region’s Active Transportation Advisory Committee (ATAC) on April 18, 2017. ATAC provided recommendations and endorsed the proposed TDM Program Plan for 2017-2021.

2425798 Page 12 of 13 74 74 August 22, 2017 Report: TES-TRS-17-17

Attachments

The proposed Transportation Demand Management Program Plan: 2017-2021 is available online at: http://www.regionofwaterloo.ca/en/gettingAround/resources/Region- of-Waterloo-Transportation-Demand-Management-Program-Plan---2017-2021.pdf

Prepared By: Kevan Marshall, Principal Planner, Transportation Demand Management

Julie Bélanger, Planner, Transportation Demand Management

Approved By: Thomas Schmidt, Commissioner, Transportation and Environmental Services

2425798 Page 13 of 13 75 75

Report: TES-TRP-17-15 Region of Waterloo

Transportation and Environmental Services

Transportation

To: Chair Tom Galloway and Members of the Planning and Works Committee

Date: August 22, 2017 File Code: T01-20/01 Snyder’s Road

Subject: Proposed All-way Stop at the Intersection of Snyder’s Road (Regional Road 1) and Sandhills Road, in the Township of Wilmot

Recommendation:

b) Add to Schedule 11, Through Highways, Waterloo Street/Snyder’s Road (Regional Road 1) from the North Side of Huron Street (Regional Road 1) to the West Side of Sandhills Road;

c) Add to Schedule 11, Through Highways, Snyder’s Road (Regional Road 1) from the East Side of Sandhills Road to the West Side of Gingerich Road/Snyder’s Road (Regional Road 6); and

d) Add to Schedule 12, Intersection Stop Signs, Snyder’s Road (Regional Road 1) intersecting at Sandhills Road, facing all directions;

in the Township of Wilmot, as outlined in Report TES-TRP-17-15, dated August 22, 2017.

Summary:

A review of current traffic operations at the intersection of Snyder’s Road and 2464444 Page 1 of 7 76 76 August 22, 2017 Report: TES-TRP-15

Sandhills Road indicates that the Collision Warrant is met as per the Region’s All-way Stop Warrant. Collisions that would be susceptible to correction with the installation of all-way stop control meet the minimum requirements for the installation of an all-way stop.

Based on the Region’s analysis and public and area municipal consultation, it is recommended that all-way stop control be implemented at the Snyder’s Road/Sandhills Road intersection.

Report:

1.0 Background

Through the Region’s ongoing countermeasures program staff determined that all-way stop control was justified under the Collision Warrant for all-way stop control at the intersection of Snyder’s Road and Sandhills Road..

2.0 Existing Conditions

Snyder’s Road is an east/west roadway with one-lane in each direction. Sandhills Road is a north/south roadway also with one lane in each direction. Snyder’s Road has a posted speed limit of 50 km/h for eastbound travel, where those approaching from the west have a posted speed limit of 60 km/h. Sandhills Road has a posted speed limit of 80 km/h approaching the intersection in both the north and southbound directions. There are stop signs on Sandhills Road to regulate the entry of northbound and southbound motorists.

Staff assessed the available sight lines and has determined that the sight lines on all approaches to the intersection meet the minimum stopping sight distance requirements.

The Average Annual Daily Traffic (AADT) at the Snyder’s Road/Sandhills Road intersection is 5751 vehicles per day. Figure 1 provides an overall view of the intersection including the existing traffic control and intersection configuration.

2464444 Page 2 of 7 77 77 August 22, 2017 Report: TES-TRP-15

Figure 1 – Existing Traffic Control at Snyder’s Road and Sandhills Road

Snyder's Road

3.0 Regional Practice for Establishing the Need for All-way Stop Control

Regional practice is to follow the warrant methodology established by provincial guidelines as documented in the Ontario Traffic Manual (OTM) Book 5 and developed through the Ministry of Transportation of Ontario. The criteria used to establish the need for an all-way stop includes collision history, vehicular/pedestrian volumes and a detailed assessment of the roadway characteristics.

Generally, an all-way stop is considered when:

• Total traffic volume entering the intersection exceeds 500 vehicles per hour over eight hours;

• Combined vehicle and pedestrian volume on the minor street exceeds 200 for the same eight hours; and

• The volume split between the main street and side street does not exceed 70/30; or

2464444 Page 3 of 7 78 78 August 22, 2017 Report: TES-TRP-15

• There is an average of four collisions per year for a three year period susceptible to correction with the installation of an all-way stop.

4.0 Regional Practice for Establishing the Need for Traffic Control Signals

Similar to all-way stop control, current Regional practice is to follow the warrant methodology established by provincial guidelines as documented in the Ontario Traffic Manual (OTM) Book 12 and developed through the Ministry of Transportation of Ontario. The criteria used to establish the need for traffic control signals includes collision history, vehicular/pedestrian volumes and a detailed assessment of the roadway characteristics.

An assessment of whether or not traffic control signals are justified is determined using the following:

• Justification 1 – Minimum Vehicle Volumes;

• Justification 2 – Delay to Cross Traffic;

• Justification 3 – Combination Warrant ;

• Justification 4 – Minimum Four-Hour Vehicle Volume;

• Justification 5 – Collision Experience; and

• Justification 6 – Pedestrian Volume.

For traffic control signals to be considered, at least one of the above justifications must satisfy 100% or the Minimum Vehicle Volume Warrant and Delay to Cross Traffic Warrant must both satisfy 80%. Justification 6, Pedestrian Volume, is used to determine the need for an intersection pedestrian signal (IPS). Generally, a minimum of 200 pedestrians must cross the main street during the eight highest hours of a typical weekday and experience delay in crossing the main road for an IPS to be considered.

5.0 All-way Stop Warrant Analysis

To assess the need for all-way stop control, vehicular and pedestrian volumes captured from the Region’s most recent turning movement count (2016) were applied to the Region’s All-way Stop Warrant methodology. The previous three years of collisions was also assessed as per the All-way Stop Warrant methodology. Table 1 summarizes the results of the All-way Stop Warrant.

2464444 Page 4 of 7 79 79 August 22, 2017 Report: TES-TRP-15

Table 1 – All-way Stop Warrant Results

Justification Actual Warrant Result

Total Volume on All Approaches 3 of 8 Hours Fulfilled Not Satisfied

Total Volume on Minor Street 2 of 8 Hours Fulfilled Not Satisfied

Volume Split Does Not Exceed 70/30 Fulfilled Satisfied

Collisions Susceptible to Correction 13 Satisfied (Minimum 12 required over 3 years)

6.0 Safety Performance of All-way Stop Intersections

A review of the collision history between 2012-2016 at the intersection of Snyder’s Road and Sandhills Road indicates that there were 16 collisions. Of the 16 collisions, 13 were noted as angle collisions and two were noted as turning movement collisions. The intersection currently ranks 271 of 3334 locations.

Research shows that all-way stop controlled intersections can reduce collisions by as much as 70%. Before and after studies conducted at recent all-way stop conversions in the Region have also indicated an 85% reduction in angle collisions after implementation.

The Region currently operates 10 intersections as all-way stop control. Of those 10, there have been 0 fatalities since the implementation of all-way stop control.

7.0 Traffic Signal Warrant Analysis

Similar to the All-way Stop Warrant analysis, traffic and pedestrian volume obtained through the most recent turning movement count were applied to the Regions Traffic Control Signal Warrant. Table 2 summarizes the results of the warrant analysis.

Table 2 – Traffic Signal Warrant Results

Justification Warrant Result

Minimum Vehicle Warrant 59%

Delay to Cross Traffic Warrant 40%

Combination Warrant Not Justified

Collision Warrant 80%

2464444 Page 5 of 7 80 80 August 22, 2017 Report: TES-TRP-15

Justification Warrant Result

Four-Hour Warrant 40%

Pedestrian Volume Not justified

The Region’s assessment indicates that traffic and pedestrian volume currently entering the Snyder’s Road/Sandhills Road intersection do not meet the need for traffic control signals at this time. Notwithstanding this, an all-way stop controlled intersection is expected to adequately enhance safety and service for motorists and pedestrians.

8.0 Public and Area Municipality Consultation

The Region arranged an online survey between July 18, 2017 and August 1, 2017. Surveys were also mailed to property owners in the immediate area to obtain feedback regarding the proposed all-way stop control at the Snyder’s Road/Sandhills Road intersection. Of 32 respondents, 14 were in favour and 18 were opposed to the proposed all-way stop.

Those opposed cited that an all-way stop would increase their travel time and increase the emission of carbon dioxide from vehicles due to additional stopping required.

Township of Wilmot staff have no concerns with the proposed all-way stop control at the Snyder’s Road and Sandhills Road intersection.

9.0 Recommendations

Based on the Region’s analysis and public and area municipal consultation it is recommended that all-way stop control be implemented at the Snyder’s Road/Sandhills Road intersection.

An all-way stop as recommended would include the following:

• Oversized stop signs and advance oversized stop-ahead warning signs on all approaches;

• Temporary (30 days) “NEW” sunburst signs above the stop ahead warning signs;

• All-way tabs affixed to all stop signs; and

• Notification signage advising of the change posted three weeks in advance of the change being made.

Figure 2 illustrates a concept of the proposed all-way stop control.

2464444 Page 6 of 7 81 81 August 22, 2017 Report: TES-TRP-15

Figure 2 – Proposed All-way Stop Control at Snyder’s Road and Sandhills Road

Corporate Strategic Plan:

This report addresses the Region’s goal to optimize road capacity to safely manage traffic and congestion (Strategic Objective 2.4).

Financial Implications:

The cost to install the all-way stop control at this intersection is approximately $1000, and funding is provided in the Region’s maintenance budget.

Other Department Consultations/Concurrence:

The Council and Administrative Services Division will be required to prepare the amending by-law.

Attachments:

Nil

Prepared By: Satinderjit Bahia, Engineering Technologist (Traffic)

Approved By: Thomas Schmidt, Commissioner of Transportation and Environmental Services 2464444 Page 7 of 7 82 82

Report: TES-17-02 COR-FFM-17-11 Region of Waterloo Transportation and Environmental Services Commissioner’s Office Corporate Services Facilities and Fleet Management

To: Chair Tom Galloway and Members of the Planning & Works Committee

Date: August 22, 2017 File Code: A20-01

Subject: Proposed Municipal Asset Management Planning Regulation

Recommendation:

That the Regional Municipality of Waterloo endorse the comments previously submitted by Regional staff and attached to report TES-17-02/COR-FFM-17-11 dated August 22, 2017, as the Region of Waterloo's input to the Province regarding the Proposed Asset Management Planning Regulation.

Summary:

As part of Ontario’s Municipal Infrastructure Strategy, the “Infrastructure for Jobs and Prosperity Act” was proclaimed in 2016 and provided the Province with the authority to regulate municipal asset management planning. The purpose of the proposed regulation is to ensure municipalities are creating long term asset management plans to address aging infrastructure. The Province intends to require all municipalities to develop strategic asset management policies, asset management plans and subsequent updates.

Comments regarding the proposed regulation were provided to the Province in July. While the Region commends the Ministry for encouraging the development of comprehensive asset management programs, the main concerns of staff are as follows:

2440242 Page 1 of 9 83 83 August 22, 2017 Report: TES-17-02/COR-FFM-17-11

1. Overlap between the proposed Asset Management Regulation and the Development Charges Act and its regulations should be managed by removal of asset management requirements from the Development Charges Act.

2. The proposed regulation is too prescriptive, and should allow alignment with other concurrent plans and activities.

3. Remove the requirement for an asset management plan “to be approved in writing by a licensed engineering practitioner representing the municipality, and the executive lead of the municipality prior to it being presented to the municipal council for approval.”

4. Public input would be better sought through the development of master plans, official plans and strategic plans (as well as the annual budget process).

5. The requirement to develop and adopt a strategic asset management policy by January 1, 2019 conflicts with the municipal election cycle. Staff suggest that the deadline to develop and adopt a strategic asset management policy be moved to January 1, 2020.

The Region is in a favourable position already having a Corporate Asset Management Governance Structure, Framework, Asset Management Policy and Asset Management Plan. In addition, the Region is engaged in an Asset Management System Implementation Project that includes corporate wide work management and decision support systems.

Report:

The draft regulation stemming from the “Infrastructure for Jobs Prosperity Act, 2015” was posted on the Province’s Environmental Registry for a 60 day review and comment period ending July 24, 2017. The proposed regulation aims to assist municipalities in identifying infrastructure needs and to work towards a sustainable funding strategy. It requires municipalities to adopt strategic asset management policies and includes content for compiling asset management plans. Council approved the Region’s Corporate Asset Management Policy in early 2016 (TES-WAS-16-01/COR-FFM-16-01) and the Asset Management Plan in the fall of 2016 (TES-WAS-16-17/COR-FFM-16-11). Future updates to both of these documents will need to reflect requirements of the regulation.

The main components of the draft regulation are discussed in the following sections.

2440242 Page 2 of 9 84 84 August 22, 2017 Report: TES-17-02/COR-FFM-17-11

A) Strategic Asset Management Policy

The proposed regulation requires all municipalities to develop a strategic asset management policy by January 1, 2019 with a formal review at least every five years. Required contents of the policy include:

• Alignment with municipal objectives (i.e. strategic plan, official plan, master plans) • Process on how the asset management plan would assist with budget development and long-term financial strategies • Approach to continuous improvement and best practices associated with asset management planning • Principles to guide asset management planning • Commitment to consider asset management planning to address risks that may be caused by climate change • Alignment with relevant policies under the Planning Act and municipal official plans • Determination of capitalization thresholds for inclusion of assets in the asset management plan in conjunction with the tangible capital asset policy • Identify asset management governance structure including Council involvement • Provide opportunities for public to provide input into asset management planning

B) Municipal Asset Management Plans

Under the proposed regulation, municipalities are required to present an asset management plan in a maximum of three phases, as follows:

• Phase 1 is to include core infrastructure assets with a completion date of January 1, 2020 (core infrastructure defined as roads; bridges; culverts; any assets used in the collection, distribution, treatment or disposal of water/waste water and storm water management) • Phase 2 is to include remaining infrastructure assets by January 1, 2021 (remaining tangible capital assets) • Phase 3 would require further details to be provided for all infrastructure assets by January 1, 2022

Within the first two phases, the following requirements are proposed:

• Measure current levels of service (community and technical) • Inventory assessment analysis of existing assets • 10-year cost forecast to sustain current levels of service • Estimated costs for service growth

2440242 Page 3 of 9 85 85 August 22, 2017 Report: TES-17-02/COR-FFM-17-11

Additional information being proposed in the final phase includes:

• Proposed levels of service (community and technical) • Updated inventory analysis • Lifecycle management strategy to maintain proposed levels of service and manage risk • 10-year financial strategy for proposed levels of service • Outline funding challenges and associated risks of not meeting the proposed level of service • Financial strategy related to service growth

Since the initial Region of Waterloo Corporate Asset Management Plan (see report TES-WAS-16-17/COR-FFM-16-11 dated September 13, 2016) has already been developed and includes all infrastructure assets, subject to approval of this regulation, staff expect to prepare one update that meets the requirements of all three phases for Council approval prior to January 1, 2020 rather than three phased annual updates.

C) Updates, Approvals, Data Collection & Public Availability

An annual progress update to Council on asset management planning would be required starting in 2021 including any factors affecting the ability to meet commitments outlined in the plan or policy. The regulation currently proposes the asset management plan be approved by a licenced engineering practitioner representing the municipality and include CAO approval prior to being presented to Council for final approval. Financial data collection by the province has been proposed consisting of sharing actuals annually and projections every 5 years. Lastly, public posting of the strategic asset management policy and asset management plan is being proposed.

Comments to Province

Regional staff submitted comments on the proposed regulation to the Ministry of Infrastructure (Ministry) in July. While the Region commends the Ministry for encouraging the development of comprehensive asset management programs, the following comments were made with the hopes that the Ministry would either provide clarification or adjust the proposed regulation to incorporate these concerns.

1. It is important to ensure alignment between Asset Management Plans and other related municipal plans and studies. The Asset Management Plan should both inform and be driven by strategic plans, financial plans and master plans. Overlap between the proposed Asset Management Regulation and other legislation, specifically the Development Charges Act and its regulations should be managed by removal of asset management requirements from the Development Charges Act.

2440242 Page 4 of 9 86 86 August 22, 2017 Report: TES-17-02/COR-FFM-17-11

2. The proposed regulation is too prescriptive, and should allow alignment with other concurrent plans and activities. For example the regulation describes a commitment to consider climate change adaptation, mitigation and disaster management. The Region has already approved a Corporate Energy Plan, Environmental Sustainability Strategy, Emergency Response Plan in addition to other departmental plans and strategies. To avoid duplicating efforts, the Asset Management Plan should reference these other Regional and departmental initiatives rather than including these details in the Asset Management Plan.

3. The regulation proposes that the plan is “to be approved in writing by a licensed engineering practitioner representing the municipality, and the executive lead of the municipality prior to it being presented to the municipal council for approval.” Asset management encompasses many different disciplines making it challenging for one individual to sign off on the plan in its entirety. The Region proposes that rather than specifying an individual or position, each Municipality should describe its asset management governance and how documents will be reviewed prior to Council approval.

4. Clarification was requested regarding a proposed “commitment to provide opportunities for municipal residents and other interested parties to provide input into asset management planning.” The existing processes outlined earlier such as master plans, official plans and strategic plans (as well as the annual budget process) all provide opportunity for public input, which in turn drive the desired service levels of the asset management plan. The Region would like to avoid duplicating this process and avoid the potential for conflicting outcomes through the public engagement process.

5. The final concern has to do with the timeline proposed in the regulation. The requirement to develop and adopt a strategic asset management policy by January 1, 2019 conflicts with the municipal election cycle. Outgoing councils could be reluctant to pass such a policy in the spring/summer of 2018 as the election approaches, and new councils will be sworn in or about December 1, 2018 leaving no time for staff to bring a new council up to speed or for a new council to get comfortable with the material. Staff suggest that the deadline to develop and adopt a strategic asset management policy be moved to January 1, 2020.

The full staff submission is attached as Appendix “A.”

2440242 Page 5 of 9 87 87 August 22, 2017 Report: TES-17-02/COR-FFM-17-11

Closing Comment

The Region’s current corporate asset management framework, policy, asset management plan along with the governance structure serve as a good foundation to build off of for conformance with the pending regulation. Input on development of the regulation was sought from over 220 municipalities and other organizations last summer, when staff attended a workshop and provided initial feedback. The Province is aiming to have the regulation in place by the end of 2017.

Corporate Strategic Plan:

Municipal asset planning aligns with the 2015-2018 Corporate Strategic Plan objective to plan for and provide the infrastructure and services necessary to create the foundation for economic success under Strategic Focus Area 1, Thriving Economy. This includes continuing to implement and improve an asset management policy and plan to optimize the use and availability of existing and new infrastructure.

Financial Implications:

The introduction of such a broad-based asset management regulation for municipalities raises the issue of long-term, predictable funding for municipal infrastructure. There is a clear disconnect between long-term asset management and renewal planning and the Federal and Provincial Governments’ emphasis on short-term, application-based infrastructure funding programs which have an “incrementality” requirement. Such programs require municipalities to consider projects which have not been planned for, or to change the timing of capital projects in order to access such funds. This is, in staff’s view, entirely inconsistent with the principles behind such a regulation. The Region expects that the Province will, in the future, take a longer view and align the requirement for long-term asset planning with infrastructure funding programs to help ensure that the right projects are completed at the right time, for the benefit of all taxpayers.

Staffing levels associated with the ongoing Asset Management Program are currently being assessed. Any proposed changes to the staffing complement that may result will be presented for Council’s consideration as part of the annual budget process.

Other Department Consultations/Concurrence:

Staff representatives from Divisions within Transportation and Environmental Services, Planning, Development and Legislative Services and Corporate Services are involved in the Corporate Asset Management Program and have been consulted in the preparation of this report.

2440242 Page 6 of 9 88 88 August 22, 2017 Report: TES-17-02/COR-FFM-17-11

Attachments:

Appendix A - Region’s Comments to Ministry of Infrastructure

Prepared By: Charles Allen, Assistant Director, Facilities Management

Tim Walton, Manager, Asset Management & Strategic Initiatives

Approved By: Craig Dyer, Commissioner, Corporate Services/Chief Financial Officer

Thomas Schmidt, Commissioner, Transportation and Environmental Services

2440242 Page 7 of 9 89 89 August 22, 2017 Report: TES-17-02/COR-FFM-17-11

2440242 Page 8 of 9 90 90 August 22, 2017 Report: TES-17-02/COR-FFM-17-11

2440242 Page 9 of 9 91 91

Report: COR-FFM-17-14 TES-TRS-17-20 Region of Waterloo Corporate Services Facilities & Fleet Management Transportation & Environmental Services Transit Services

To: Chair Tom Galloway and Members of the Planning & Works Committee

Date: August 22, 2017 File Code: A19-01

Subject: Vehicle Idling

Recommendation:

For Information

Summary:

Nil

Report:

This report provides additional information on driver training and enforcement tools related to vehicle idling in response to questions raised in the 2017 budget process.

Background:

All drivers of regional vehicles receive training on the protocols and expectations around vehicle idling. Specifically, the Driver’s Handbook identifies protocols for the normal course of Regional vehicle use (excluding Transit buses). Grand River Transit outlines anti-idling procedures in the Bus Operator Manual. The procedures recognize the requirement to provide a safe and comfortable environment to riders while minimizing fuel consumption and associated green house gas emissions. The specific requirements in each document are outlined in Appendix A.

2490533 Page 1 of 5 92 92 August 22, 2017 Report: COR-FFM-17-14/TES-TRS-17-20

All operators of Regional vehicles are given driver training which includes a thorough review of the Driver’s Handbook and/or Bus Operator Manual. In addition, all new Bus Operators are instructed on the requirements of the idling control policy and they are instructed on fuel efficient vehicle operating techniques.

Enforcement:

Enforcement of the above noted anti-idling procedures is the responsibility of each supervisor and is currently managed through a combination of direct observation and public complaints follow up. Given the diversity of vehicles and the geographic spread, this is frequently very challenging. Fleet Management and GRT Fleet work closely with supervisors to develop and implement a number of technology and other solutions to provide the information and data necessary to meet this responsibility. Key examples include:

Idling controls: Anti-idling devices provide auxiliary power sources as an alternative to the vehicle’s engine in order to provide power for certain critical functions based on vehicle needs. Examples of supported critical systems include: emergency lighting, aerial truck boom, interior cab heating/cooling, and lift gates. These devices operate under a pre-determined set of parameters so that these operational needs can be maintained even if the vehicle isn’t idling. Once the parameters are set, the vehicle when in anti-idling mode will stop and start during this period to maintain the expected requirements. Fleet Management tested approximately 12 units across the Region and GRT mobility plus. This pilot was considered a limited success due to low user acceptance and high unit cost.

Permanent idling control solutions have been implemented where positive results were shown, such as:

• Adding idling controls to aerial and sign trucks to manage idle time related to high operational requirements.; • Purchasing a hybrid aerial truck, which has the stop/start functionality built in to minimize engine run time; • Programming of heavy equipment “on-board” computers at Waste Management to shut down after a few minutes of idle time; • Installation of auxiliary equipment (e.g. Webasto or OEM) vs. idling primary engine to aid in vehicle warm up during cold weather starts and or for HVAC needs during stationary operations;

2490533 Page 2 of 5 93 93 August 22, 2017 Report: COR-FFM-17-14/TES-TRS-17-20

• GRT has recently implemented automatic idling control measures on approximately 80% of the conventional buses in the fleet. Buses capable of being programmed with the idle control function will shut down automatically if there is no driver input after six minutes. The duration of six minutes was selected after consideration of passenger comfort and an analysis of scheduled bus layover times. All new buses will be equipped with this feature.

Telematics: These units collect data on all aspects of vehicle operations including idling and are considered to be a good tool for managing both vehicle performance and environmental impact. Fleet Management has successfully piloted approximately 50 telematics units and is in the process of developing a plan to implement these devices across the Corporate fleet of vehicles. This includes researching an economical way of communicating from the on-board devices to a central data collection and as well trying to accommodate the many other potential uses of telematics for various program areas.

Education: Extending the training of operators and supervisors beyond the initial drivers training to ensure ongoing awareness of the impact of extended idling of diesel and gas vehicles and associated life cycle, maintenance, downtime and cost impacts.

Greening the Fleet: By right sizing the fleet and selecting fuel efficiency design solutions, the impact of idling can be greatly reduced even without eliminating idling.

Reporting: Regular reporting on fuel usage/cost for all vehicles provides key data to identify poor performers and find ways to reduce fuel usage. The reasons range from vehicle design to improper operating practices such as extended idling.

Corporate Strategic Plan:

Enforcement of anti-idling procedures supports Focus Area 3, Environment and Sustainable Growth by enhancing efforts to improve air quality (Objective 3.3).

Financial Implications: Nil

Other Department Consultations/Concurrence:

Staff from Fleet Management work with supervisors in all Regional departments to ensure the appropriate information and data is available to enforce anti-idling procedures.

Attachments:

Appendix A – Driver Training

2490533 Page 3 of 5 94 94 August 22, 2017 Report: COR-FFM-17-14/TES-TRS-17-20

Prepared By: Ellen McGaghey, Director, Facilities & Fleet Management

Eric Gillespie, Director, Transit Services

Approved By: Craig Dyer, Commissioner, Corporate Services/Chief Financial Officer

Thomas Schmidt, Commissioner, Transportation & Environmental Services

2490533 Page 4 of 5 95 95 August 22, 2017 Report: COR-FFM-17-14/TES-TRS-17-20

Appendix A – Driver Training

Drivers Handbook

4.9 Engine Idling

Engines of Regional vehicles should not be left idling unnecessarily. Unattended Regional vehicles must not be left with the engine running.

Engines are to be shut off except when using Power Take Off (PTO) operated equipment, when radio operation is necessary and/or when using amber safety lights. During the winter months, it may be necessary to leave a vehicle running for short periods of time to prevent the windows from freezing.

Bus Operator Handbook

4.12 Idling Control Policy and Excessive Revving of Engines

Grand River Transit is committed to lowering our impact on the environment and to improving the air quality. Employee cooperation in helping to improve air quality and reducing greenhouse gas emissions is of prime importance.

4.12a On-Street Operations

Grand River Transit employees are required:

• To look for opportunities to minimize unnecessary vehicle idling time.

• To turn off the vehicle engine prior to leaving a vehicle unattended.

• To turn off the vehicle where there are no customers on board and when waiting at a pick-up location i.e. school specials.

• When customers are on-board at a lay-over of up to 10 minutes, Bus Operators may idle the vehicle for the comfort of the customers. If turning the engine off compromises the safety of customers or employees idling is permitted.

2490533 Page 5 of 5 96 96

Report: PDL-CPL-17-24 Region of Waterloo Planning, Development and Legislative Services Community Planning

To: Chair Tom Galloway and Members of the Planning and Works Committee

Date: August 22, 2017 File Code: A20-31

Subject: Regionally Owned Properties Adjacent to Schneider Haus

Recommendation:

Summary:

The Region has owned and operated the Schneider Haus National Historic Site (NHS) as a living history museum since 1981. Over the past 35 years, the Region has worked to restore the Schneider Haus and surrounding landscape, and to provide authentic programming and interpretation of the site. The museum depicts life in 1856, when the second generation of the Schneider family occupied the homestead.

In 1989 and 1991 the two neighbouring houses, 474 and 484 Queen Street South, were purchased by the Region with the intent to demolish the homes and use the space to improve the museum. In 1996, the City of Kitchener designated the Victoria Park area, including the Schneider Haus and neighbouring properties, as a Heritage Conservation District (HCD). Demolition within the HCD is discouraged.

The Region would like to move forward with the proposed plans to enhance the Schneider Haus NHS by submitting an application to the City of Kitchener for demolition of the heritage designated buildings at 474 and 484 Queen Street South.

#2364867 Page 1 of 11

97 97 August 22, 2017 Report: PDL-CPL-17-24

The proposed plans would provide many benefits to the museum, the community, and the Region. The prominence and visibility of the Schneider Haus would be significantly improved, better reflecting the site’s national significance, and increasing accessibility and visitors to the site. The Schneider Haus would be surrounded by a more authentic landscape, enhancing interpretation of the first 100 years of early settlement history in the area. Lastly, much needed additional space would be available for outdoor programming; expanding the scope of education programs; playing period games; erecting a large tent for big events; increasing safety; and providing historic demonstrations.

From a heritage conservation perspective, there is a strong site-specific case for proceeding with the Region’s plans for the museum and the associated demolition of these two houses. The Region has undertaken a Heritage Impact Assessment (HIA) which provides a professional third party review of the proposed enhancements and related demolitions. The HIA states that although demolition within an HCD is typically discouraged, the proposed alterations would substantially benefit the Schneider Haus NHS, have minimal impacts to the HCD, would not set a precedent for future demolitions, and are consistent with the provincial guidelines and national conservation standards for conserving historic places.

The Region consulted with the community on the proposed enhancements, and has received comments from a diverse group of individuals including immediate and nearby neighbours, museum visitors, local residents, heritage group members (Waterloo Historical Society (WHS), Architectural Conservancy of Ontario (ACO), Friends of the Joseph Schneider Haus (JSH)), members of the Regional Heritage Planning Advisory Committee (HPAC), and Schneider family descendants.

The majority of respondents supported the proposed enhancements as an opportunity to restore the historic integrity of the Schneider Haus site; enhance the profile of the NHS; provide additional opportunities for heritage programming in the core area; improve the neighbourhood, and continue to build on the museum’s accessibility and authenticity. Regional staff are confident that any concerns raised through the consultation process can be addressed. For example, Regional staff are committed to ensuring that the demolitions do not set a precedent within the HCD, documenting and salvaging the structures prior to demolition, continued investment in affordable housing, and making sure that the museum makes full use of the additional space.

Report:

The Schneider Haus, located at 466 Queen Street South, Kitchener is a Georgian-frame farmhouse built in 1816 by Joseph Schneider, a Pennsylvania-German Mennonite, and one of the City’s founding families. It is nationally recognized for its association with the 19th century Mennonite migration to the Waterloo area, the oldest surviving house in Kitchener, and the only structure in the Victoria Park Heritage Conservation District that 2364867 Page 2 of 11 98 98 August 22, 2017 Report: PDL-CPL-17-24

pre-dates confederation.

The site was established as a museum owned and operated by the Region in 1981, and was recognized as a National Historic Site in 1999. As archaeological and historic research uncovered details about the original farmstead, the Region has worked towards re-creating the yard and outbuildings to augment the farmhouse and add authenticity to the site.

The two adjacent properties between Schneider Haus and Schneider Avenue, 474 and 484 Queen Street South are also owned by the Region. They were purchased in 1989 and 1991 with plans to demolish the houses and add to the landscape of the historic house by restoring the side yard of the farmstead. The houses on these properties were constructed in 1923/4 and 1928 respectively. Removal of the houses and re- establishing the open yard and appropriate landscaping would more accurately show the farmstead as it existed in the mid-19th century, which is the time period being interpreted by the museum.

An illustration of the proposed future use of the lands is shown in Attachment 1. The concept includes open space that most accurately represents the original farmstead landscape based on the best information available (see Attachment 2). A portion will be set aside to represent a mid-1850s natural green space with appropriate wildflowers and grasses and will be scythed as opposed to mowed to maintain the historical appearance. The large evergreen trees in front of the house would also be removed, as they are a post-1930 addition and not appropriately located for a Pennsylvania German Mennonite Hof.

These properties are all located within the Victoria Park Heritage Conservation District (HCD), designated by the City of Kitchener under Part V of the Ontario Heritage Act in 1998. Potential changes within the HCD, particularly the proposed removal of two designated buildings, required significant research and assessment prior to recommendations being considered by the City’s Municipal Heritage Advisory Committee (Heritage Kitchener) and City Council. In order to initiate this consideration, the Region commissioned a Heritage Impact Assessment.

The HIA preparation was guided by the typical requirements of the City of Kitchener, includes the components noted in Regional Official Plan Policy 3.G.17, and provides an analysis of the proposed alterations based on the Ontario Ministry of Tourism Culture and Sport’s Eight Guiding Principles in the Conservation of Built Heritage Properties and the Standards and Guidelines for the Conservation of Historic Places in Canada, 2010.

The HIA found that while the proposed improvements to the Schneider Haus would result permanent loss of two structures within the HCD, the impact to the integrity of the HCD was minor and could be mitigated through documentation and salvage, and is 2364867 Page 3 of 11 99 99 August 22, 2017 Report: PDL-CPL-17-24

outweighed by the opportunity to restore the Schneider Haus cultural heritage landscape, which is a rare and valuable resource to the City and the Region.

Some of the key findings of the HIA are summarized in the following paragraphs. The Executive Summary is in Attachment 3.

In review of the Region’s proposed plans, it is acknowledged that there are two competing heritage considerations. The presence of these houses detracts from the restoration and interpretation of the Schneider Haus cultural heritage landscape, while their removal conflicts with the goals and policies of the HCD plan.

The proposed alteration benefits the nationally significant Schneider Haus and is consistent with the Canadian conservation standards. The Standards and Guidelines for the Conservation of Historic Places in Canada (2010) recommends the selective removal of non character-defining features that support the land use from periods other than the chosen restoration period, and relying on documentary evidence and making interventions necessary to preserve character-defining elements. Re-establishing the context of the open side yard shown in period drawings of the site would improve the authentic interpretation of this historic site, strengthen the contextual value of the cultural heritage landscape, and restore the traditional street view of the property. The landscape of the farm, as shown in Attachment 2, had open space along Queen Street on both sides of the front veranda.

Although removing the houses would alter the layer of history that has been added in the 20th century to these specific properties, the overall integrity of the HCD would remain intact. Both buildings are representative of a typical 20th century house building style, built post-1920 similar to about 30% of the houses in the HCD, and do not have significant architectural features. 474 Queen Street South has an unusual dormer, but a comparable one exists on Roy Street. Neither has a strong historic/associative value, and they are not part of a consistent streetscape on Queen Street which has evolved further since the HCD was approved.

The proposed demolitions also would not create a precedent for future demolitions in the HCD, as the planned enhancements to the Schneider Haus landscape is a unique undertaking that could not be proposed elsewhere in the City. The Region’s plans are to enhance an historic asset for broad community benefit, not a typical redevelopment proposal. In order to ensure that a demolition precedent is not set, conditions may be added to the heritage permit that require further heritage protection of the Schneider Haus, and limit the development potential of the neighbouring properties (i.e. no future use for parking, commercial, or residential purposes).

The Regional Official Plan, policy 3.G.21 does contemplate the potential removal of heritage structures owned by the Region: Other Regionally owned heritage buildings, bridges, or properties will be protected, restored or rehabilitated, wherever feasible, and 2364867 Page 4 of 11 100 100 August 22, 2017 Report: PDL-CPL-17-24

where not feasible, the building or structural elements will be reused to the extent possible.

In addition to restoring the significant cultural heritage landscape associated with the Schneider Haus, removing the houses at 474 and 484 Queen Street South offers other advantages to the museum, the community, and the Region:

• Museum operations will be enhanced through the additional space for outdoor programming immediately adjacent to the house. The natural green space will be used for education programming and provide space for outdoor games. The scope of education programs will be expanded to include more science as well as history when students explore this habitat. The site day camps and visiting groups will have space to play period games and to explore this property. It will be possible to put up a large tent for big events like Canada Day with activities running rain or shine. The popular annual Easter Egg Hunt will be safer with all the visitors on the same side of the street and a larger area available for hiding the eggs. Demonstrations of popular and historically appropriate activities (such as blacksmithing) will take place. • The Schneider Haus will be much more visible from the street. Activities taking place on the porch and in the front yard will be seen and draw visitors to the site. • The natural green space will be an asset as residential growth on Queen Street intensifies • The natural green space will provide beneficial habitat for flora and fauna within the urban environment. • The houses at 474 and 484 Queen have suffered significant damage due to tenants and storms and would require a large investment to return them to rental status. • Increasing the visual separation between Schneider Haus and its neighbours will also reduce the risk of vandalism and damage to this important museum facility and historic site.

From June 26 to July 22, the Region undertook a community consultation to receive input on the potential enhancements to the Schneider Haus, and on possible challenges, concerns and considerations related to the project. Information was shared online (377 visitors) and at the museum through a static and staffed display (over 450 visitors) and open house (35 participants). 158 comments were received from a diverse group of individuals including immediate and nearby neighbours, museum visitors, local residents, heritage group members (Waterloo Historical Society (WHS), Architectural Conservancy of Ontario (ACO), Friends of the Joseph Schneider Haus (JSH)), members of the Regional Heritage Planning Advisory Committee (HPAC), and Schneider family descendants.

The majority of respondents voiced support for the proposed enhancements, stating that it would: • restore the historic integrity of the Schneider Haus site; 2364867 Page 5 of 11 101 101 August 22, 2017 Report: PDL-CPL-17-24

• enhance the profile of the NHS; • provide additional opportunities for heritage programming in the core area; • improve the neighbourhood; and • continue to build on the museum’s accessibility and authenticity.

Regional staff are confident that the concerns raised through the consultation process can be addressed. For example, Regional staff are committed to ensuring that the demolitions do not set a precedent within the HCD, documenting and salvaging the structures prior to demolition, continued investment in affordable housing, and making sure that the museum makes full use of the additional space.

In summary, there is solid public support and a strong site-specific heritage conservation case for proceeding with the Region’s plans for the museum and the associated demolition of these two houses. Subject to approval by Kitchener Council to demolish the two houses, the Region will procure a Heritage Resources Documentation Report, which would include a photographic record. The buildings would be demolished shortly thereafter. A reasonable effort will be made to salvage reusable heritage materials prior to or during demolition.

Corporate Strategic Plan:

This report supports Strategic Objective 1.3 – Enhance arts, culture and heritage opportunities to enrich the lives of residents and attract talent and visitors.

Financial Implications:

These two houses are in Regional ownership and are currently vacant but being managed and maintained at an annual cost of $15,000.

The potential removal of 474 and 484 Queen Street South and subsequent landscaping is included in the $400,000 for site development projects currently in the approved Schneider Haus Ten Year Capital Forecast (capital project 43012).

Other Department Consultations/Concurrence:

This report has been prepared by Cultural Services in consultation with Facilities and Fleet Management staff.

Attachments

Attachment 1: Rendering of Proposed Future Use

Attachment 2: Original Farmstead Landscape

Attachment 3: Executive Summary of Heritage Impact Assessment 2364867 Page 6 of 11 102 102 August 22, 2017 Report: PDL-CPL-17-24

Prepared By: Kate Hagerman, Cultural Heritage Supervisor

Approved By: Rod Regier, Commissioner of Planning, Development and Legislative Services

2364867 Page 7 of 11 103 103 August 22, 2017 Report: PDL-CPL-17-24

Attachment 1: Rendering of Proposed Future Use

2364867 Page 8 of 11 104 104 August 22, 2017 Report: PDL-CPL-17-24

Attachment 2: Original Farmstead Landscape

2364867 Page 9 of 11 105 105 August 22, 2017 Report: PDL-CPL-17-24

Attachment 3: Executive Summary of Heritage Impact Assessment

2364867 Page 10 of 11 106 106 August 22, 2017 Report: PDL-CPL-17-24

2364867 Page 11 of 11 107 107

Report: PDL-CPL-17-26 PDL-LEG-17-57 Region of Waterloo Planning, Development and Legislative Services Community Planning

To: Chair Tom Galloway and Members of the Planning and Works Committee

Date: August 22, 2017 File Code: D16-60

Subject: Ontario Municipal Board Reform - Bill 139 – Building Better Communities and Conserving Watersheds Act, 2017

Recommendation:

That the Regional Municipality of Waterloo forward Report PDL-CPL-17-26, dated August 22, 2017 to the Minister of Municipal Affairs in response to Bill 139 - (Schedule 3) – the proposed Building Better Communities and Conserving Watersheds Act, 2017: Amendments to the Planning Act and the Conservation Authorities Act.

Summary:

In 2015 and 2016 respectively, the Province initiated a review of the Conservation Authorities Act and the Ontario Municipal Board (OMB). Regional staff commented on the review of the Conservation Authorities Act through reports PDL-CPL-15-51 dated October 6, 2015 and PDL-CPL-16-40 dated September 13, 2016. Through these reports, the Region did not identify any substantive concerns with the existing Conservation Authorities Act or the proposed changes.

With respect to the OMB review, Regional Council provided comments to the Province through report PDL-CPL-16-55 dated December 6, 2016. This report requested that the Province give consideration to several key recommendations (Attachment 1 contains a comparative table of the full list of recommendations and the provisions proposed in Bill 139) including: restricting appeals of planning documents that have been approved by a second approval authority (i.e., upper tier or the Province); limiting the use of “De Novo” hearings; developing a consistent set of criteria for oral and written decisions by OMB members; and, triaging appeals according to type and complexity. 2466358 Page 1 of 22 108 108 August 22, 2017 Report: PDL-CPL-17-26/PDL-LEG-17-57

After taking into consideration the feedback received on the review of the OMB and the Conservation Authorities Act, the Province introduced the proposed Building Better Communities and Conserving Watersheds Act, 2017 (Bill 139) on May 30, 2017. The five (5) components of Bill 139 include:

1. Enactment of the Local Planning Appeal Tribunal Act, 2017;

2. Enactment of the Local Planning Appeal Support Centre Act, 2017;

3. Amendments to the Planning Act, the City of Toronto Act, and the Ontario Planning and Development Act;

4. Amendments to the Conservation Authorities Act; and,

5. Amendments to various Acts consequential to the enactment of the Local Planning Appeal Tribunal Act, 2017.

Bill 139 proposes a suite of changes aimed at overhauling Ontario’s land use planning appeals system, currently administered by the OMB. This report provides a detailed summary of these proposed changes as they relate to responding to the Environmental Registry Posting #013-0590 (due September 1, 2017) and Environmental Registry Posting #013-0561 (Attachment 2, due and submitted July 31, 2017), which deals with the proposed changes to the Planning Act and the Conservation Authorities Act, including:

• Renaming the OMB as the new Local Planning Appeal Tribunal (the Tribunal);

• Restricting and limiting the scope of Official Plan-related appeals;

• Expanding the scope given to Local Appeal Bodies;

• Limiting the use of De Novo hearings and providing greater weight to the municipal process and decisions;

• Introducing the option to designate Major Transit Station Areas and policies in official plans, which then become unappealable, except by the Minister of Municipal Affairs;

• Providing greater weight to the municipal process and decisions;

• Requiring Conservation Authorities to provide certain mandatory programs and services set out in new regulations; and,

• Permitting an authority to enter into a memorandum of understanding with a municipality to provide programs or services. #2466358 Page 2 of 22

109 109 August 22, 2017 Report: PDL-CPL-17-26/PDL-LEG-17-57

Regional staff’s response to the Environmental Registry posting on July 31, 2017 (which was sent as a placeholder pending Regional Council’s approval of this report) and the upcoming September 1, 2017 posting due date for the Bill 139 (OMB) feedback, includes several key comments and recommendations for the Province, requesting that:

• further assurances be provided in the transition and/or implementing regulations with respect to restricting appeals in circumstances where regional policy, enhanced or introduced through an official plan or official plan amendment, is more restrictive than provincial policy; • A public commenting period be provided on the forthcoming transition and implementation regulations prior to proclamation of Bill 139; and, • Increase the time frame from the proposed 90 days for a municipal council to reconsider an item referred back by the Local Planning Appeals Tribunal.

Overall, Regional staff are supportive of the proposed changes to the OMB, listed above, through Bill 139 and would recommend that the Province proceed to pass this legislation as quickly as possible, subject to the comments and further recommendations discussed below in this report, in order to provide greater certainty to all parties involved in the land use planning appeal process. These proposed changes, once fully implemented, are seen by Regional staff as having the potential to provide greater weight to the municipal process and decisions, and greatly reduce the time, expense and uncertainty associated with the appeals process.

Report:

In September 2016, the Premier of Ontario directed the Minister of Municipal Affairs, working with the Attorney General of Ontario, to lead a review of the scope and effectiveness of the Ontario Municipal Board (OMB). The public consultation process undertaken by the Province requested comment under five themes:

1. OMB’s jurisdictions and powers;

2. Citizen participation and local perspective;

3. Clear and predictable decision-making;

4. Modern procedures and faster decisions; and,

5. Alternative dispute resolution and fewer hearings.

The Region provided comments and recommendations to the Province as set out in Report PDL-CPL-16-55, dated December 6, 2016. The recommendations included: #2466358 Page 3 of 22

110 110 August 22, 2017 Report: PDL-CPL-17-26/PDL-LEG-17-57

• Restricting appeals of planning documents that have been approved by a second approval authority as well as strengthening and adding new language to Provincial policy documents to explicitly and unambiguously identify the policy elements, including their implementation in municipal planning documents, are that are unappealable; • Introducing a robust pre-screening tool to identify appeals without merit; • Enhancing Provincial participation in OMB hearings; • Limiting use of “de novo” hearings; and, • Triaging appeals according to type and complexity.

On May 30, 2017, Bill 139 - Building Better Communities and Conserving Watersheds Act, 2017 (“Bill 139”) received 1st reading in the Legislature. Bill 139 proposes new legislation to rename the OMB as the Local Planning Appeal Tribunal and to make amendments to existing legislation including the Planning Act, and the Conservation Authorities Act. A request for comments has been posted on the Environmental Registry due August 14th in respect to the new Local Planning Appeal Tribunal Act 2017, Local Planning Appeal Support Centre Act 2017, and amendments to the Planning Act (due July 31st for the proposed changes to the Conservation Authorities Act). Given the timing of the comment period, draft comments were provided to the Ministries in line with the due dates on the EBR as placeholders pending Council’s decision with respect to this report.

This report addresses the proposed changes to the OMB and the Planning Act and then subsequently addresses the proposed changes to the Conservation Authorities Act.

Proposed major changes through Bill 139 relating to the OMB and the Planning Act may be summarized as follows:

1) Renaming the OMB as the new Local Planning Appeal Tribunal (the Tribunal); 2) Restricting and limiting the scope of planning appeals to the Tribunal; 3) Expanding the scope given to Local Appeal Bodies; 4) Limiting the use of De Novo hearings; 5) Major Transit Station Areas appeal limitations; 6) Requirement to consider climate change in official plans; 7) Providing greater weight to the municipal process and decisions; 8) Creation of the Local Planning Appeal Support Centre; and, 9) Transition and implementation regulations.

1. Renaming the Ontario Municipal Board (OMB) with a new Local Planning Appeal Tribunal (LPAT)

Bill 139 is proposing to repeal the Ontario Municipal Board Act, replace it with the Local #2466358 Page 4 of 22

111 111 August 22, 2017 Report: PDL-CPL-17-26/PDL-LEG-17-57

Planning Appeal Tribunal Act, 2017, and continue the OMB under a new name, the Local Planning Appeal Tribunal (the Tribunal). This Tribunal will remain at the provincial level and continue as an independent tribunal that will make decisions on land use planning matters at arms length to the government. The provisions proposed in the Local Planning Appeal Tribunal Act, 2017 relate primarily to the procedures and practices for conducting proceedings before the Tribunal.

• Comment: This change is supported and Regional staff are encouraged that the Province is taking a proactive approach to streamlining the appeals process in Ontario.

2. Restricting and limiting the scope of Official Plan-related appeals

Bill 139 proposes to restrict a broad range of municipal land use planning decisions from appeal, including:

i. No appeal of an official plan or official plan amendments if the approval authority is the Minister (Section 17 and 26 of the Planning Act). There is no appeal in respect of the Minister’s approval of an official plan or official plan amendment which would include official plans or amendments to ensure conformity with Provincial Plans and Policies, as they related to upper tier municipal official plans;

ii. Restricting appeals of official plans/official plan amendments that are exempt from Ministerial approval to only matters of consistency with Provincial policies, plans, Regional official plans, or where the Minister of Municipal Affairs has identified a matter of Provincial interest that may be affected. It is noted that with Bill 139 there will be a broader range of Provincial Plans and policy statements that must be considered in making decisions under the Act;

iii. Any decision on an Official Plan Amendment that is exempt from Ministerial approval may only be appealed on the grounds of inconsistency with Provincial policies, plans, Regional official plans, and that the requested amendment is not consistent with policy statements, fails to conform with or conflicts with Provincial Plans, and fails to conform with Regional official plans. The notice of appeal must detail the specific part(s) of the plan to which the appeal relates and explain the non-conformity and/or conflict. If the Tribunal is of the opinion that the notice of appeal does not disclose both grounds of appeal, the Tribunal shall dismiss the appeal;

iv. If the Tribunal determines that part of a decision of a council to adopt an

#2466358 Page 5 of 22

112 112 August 22, 2017 Report: PDL-CPL-17-26/PDL-LEG-17-57

official plan/official plan amendment is inconsistent with Provincial Policy, fails to conform with or conflicts with a Provincial Plan, or fails to conform with the official plan of the upper-tier municipality, the Tribunal shall refuse to approve that part of the plan and notify the municipality that they have the opportunity to make a new decision. If the municipality fails to make a new decision within 90 days, a further appeal can be made to the Tribunal and the Tribunal has the authority to approve all or part of the plan, make modifications and approval all or part as modified or refuse to approve all or part of the plan;

v. The time period in respect of appeals for failure to make a decision on an official plan/official plan amendment has been extended from 180 days to 210 days;

vi. Restricting applications to amend official plans or secondary plans for two years, unless permitted by municipal council;

vii. There are similar limitations and restrictions on appeals of council’s passing of zoning by-laws/zoning by-law amendments; and,

viii. Only the Minister may appeal the initial passing of an interim control by-law. A by-law to extend the period of interim control is subject to appeal.

• Comment/recommendation: These changes are generally supported, particularly since they align with recommendations from PDL-CPL-16-55, and the intent of these changes is to streamline the appeals process. Staff recommends that further assurances be provided in the transition and implementation regulations with respect to restricting appeals in circumstances where regional policy, enhanced or introduced through an official plan or official plan amendments, is more restrictive than provincial policy.

These provisions, together with the requirement that the Tribunal notify a council of the opportunity to make a new decision are proposed to give greater weight to the municipal process and municipal decisions. In addition, this could greatly reduce the time, expense and uncertainty associated with the current appeals process.

Regional staff recommend that in circumstances where the Tribunal agrees with the appellant and provides the municipality with the opportunity to make a new decision, a review period of longer than 90 days be provided. For example, the City of Cambridge, in their comments on Bill 139, suggested 140 days. This would give the municipality sufficient time to effectively review and prepare a #2466358 Page 6 of 22

113 113 August 22, 2017 Report: PDL-CPL-17-26/PDL-LEG-17-57

report for Council

Regional staff would note that currently, a municipality (as well as other persons) can appeal a Minister’s decision with respect to official plans or official plan amendment, under Section 17 of the Planning Act. For example, under the approval process of the current Regional Official Plan, the Region appealed the Minister’s decision based on modifications to several of the Region’s new policies related to source water protection, the extraction of mineral aggregate resources below the water table, and the approval of an incorrect version of Map 3 that omitted the Protected Countryside designation in the Southwest Kitchener area. If these changes are brought into force and effect, this appeal provision would no longer apply to both the Region and other persons.

3. Expanding the scope given to Local Appeal Bodies

Since 2006, the Planning Act has permitted either an upper tier municipality or an area municipality to create and appoint a Local Appeal Body subject to meeting conditions set out in Regulation 551/06. This body can currently only hear local appeals related to consents and minor variances. Bill 139 proposes to amend the Planning Act to extend these powers to include hearings related to site plan appeals.

To date, the only municipality to have moved forward with the creation of a Local Appeal Body is the City of Toronto, albeit under the authority of a different Act, the City of Toronto Act. Starting on May 3 of this year, all Committee of Adjustment appeals in the City of Toronto are now heard by their Local Appeal Body.

• Comment: This change is supported as the expansion in scope given to Local Appeal Bodies provides for further autonomy to area municipalities and for the possibility of greater efficiencies in the appeals process. However, concerns regarding the potential to create a Local Appeal Body are generally related to resourcing such an initiative at the municipal level.

4. Limiting the use of De Novo hearings and Providing Greater Weight to the Municipal Process and Decisions

Under the current appeals process, the OMB conducts “de novo” hearings. This means that while the OMB must “have regard to” decisions by municipal councils and can consider new information in certain cases throughout the appeals process, the Board has the authority to overturn the original municipal decision.

Bill 139 proposes to significantly reduce the Tribunal’s ability to conduct “de novo” hearings and thereby, overturn a municipal decision with respect to official plans, zoning by-laws, or plans of subdivision. Under the proposed legislative changes, when making #2466358 Page 7 of 22

114 114 August 22, 2017 Report: PDL-CPL-17-26/PDL-LEG-17-57

a decision, an approval authority (including the Tribunal), shall have regard to any decision by a municipal council that relates to the matter and any information and material the municipal council considered in making its decision. This includes decisions on an official plan or zoning by-law, a matter of provincial interest in an official plan or zoning by-law, an appeal of an extension of an interim control by-law, site plan matters, or an appeal of a draft plan of subdivision or consent.

• Comment: This change is supported. These provisions, together with the requirement that the Tribunal notify a council of the opportunity to make a new decision, and expanded authority for local appeal bodies, are proposed to give greater weight to the municipal process and municipal decisions.

5. Streamlining Case Management

Bill 139 proposes substantial changes to the practices and procedures for matters that have been appealed to the Tribunal and how certain appeals will be conducted in order to streamline the appeals process, including:

i. the Tribunal’s power to make rules specifically provides for the use of alternatives to the traditional adjudicative or adversarial procedures such as hearings to be held in writing or by electronic or automated means, and providing for when and how the Tribunal may hear from a person other than a party to the proceeding;

ii. mandatory case management conferences to identify additional parties, identify or narrow issues, identify facts or evidence that may be agreed upon, provide directions for disclosure of information, and to discuss opportunities for settlement (including the use of mediation or other dispute resolution processes) for appeals relating to official plans, official plan amendments, zoning by-laws, zoning by-law amendments, and plans of subdivision where the approval authority has failed to make a decision (“Planning Appeals”). The approval authority whose decision or failure to make a decision is the subject of the appeal will be the participants in the mandatory case management conference. The Tribunal may permit other persons to participate as a party or otherwise based on a written submission that is received prior to the case management conference. The Tribunal will have the power to direct parties to participate in a case management conference in any other matter; and,

iii. the Tribunal will have the power to decide whether to hold an oral hearing of a Planning Appeal. If an oral hearing is ordered, the Tribunal will identify each party or persons who may participate and make time-limited oral submission. Most significantly, no party or person may adduce evidence or call or examine

#2466358 Page 8 of 22

115 115 August 22, 2017 Report: PDL-CPL-17-26/PDL-LEG-17-57

witnesses. It is expected that the forthcoming regulations will provide more detail on the conduct and format of hearings, practices regarding the admission of evidence, the format of decisions and time lines.

• Comment: These changes are supported. The proposed changes to this part of the appeals process is a positive step towards providing more recognition to the substantial efforts of area municipal councils and municipal decision-making processes, specifically as they relate to public consultation and participation.

The cumulative effect of these changes is to effectively eliminate the de novo hearing of Planning Appeals. The mandatory case management conference allows for a more Tribunal-directed process, which along with the greater scope for alternative forms of hearings than oral hearings, together with the restriction on adducing evidence and examining witnesses, can provide greater efficiency and expediency to the resolution of the appeal.

5. Major Transit Station Areas appeal limitations

A proposed change that would have implications for the Region is allowing municipalities to designate lands in their official plans as "protected major transit station areas." Where such a designation is made, the designation and supporting policies are unappealable, except by the Minister. Requests to amend these policies could only be made with council approval, and a council's decision not to approve a request is not appealable. Where municipalities have designated lands in their official plans as "protected major transit station areas", zoning by-laws that establish densities or heights for such an area are also unappealable, except by the Minister.

• Comment: This proposed change is supported since the intent of this measure supports the higher density targets included in the 2017 Provincial Growth Plan and aligns with the Region’s efforts, through the ROP, to facilitate development in key transit oriented areas.

6. Requirement to consider Climate Change

Bill 139 proposes to amend the Planning Act such that it will require local councils or approval authorities to consider climate change issues when developing official plans. Specifically, Bill 139 would amend the Planning Act requiring an official plan to “contain policies that identify goals, objectives and actions to mitigate greenhouse gas emissions and to provide for adaptations to a changing climate, including through increasing resiliency.”

• Comment: This proposed provision in Bill 139 is supported, as it aligns with the #2466358 Page 9 of 22

116 116 August 22, 2017 Report: PDL-CPL-17-26/PDL-LEG-17-57

recently approved amendment to the Places to Grow Act, which came into force July 1, 2017. Including these policies is intended to ensure that municipalities prepare for the effects of climate change on current and future infrastructure, and to provide for enhanced environmental protection. Having more specific climate change policies within the Regional Official Plan (ROP) will help build on the Region’s existing work on reducing greenhouse gas emissions in collaboration with Community partners. In addition, the next iteration of the ROP could be used to influence other stakeholders to plan to adapt to changing climate conditions by addressing vulnerabilities within the Waterloo Region and risks to community quality of life and the local economy.

7. Creation of the Local Planning Appeal Support Centre

Bill 139 includes the proposed Local Planning Appeal Support Centre Act, 2017 which would create a new Local Planning Appeal Support Centre. The Centre will be a not- for-profit corporation that is accountable to the Government. The members of the board will be appointed by the Lieutenant Governor in Council. The support services to be provided by the Centre include information on land use planning, guidance on Tribunal procedures, advice or representation and any other service prescribed by regulation. These services will be available to eligible persons throughout the Province.

• Comment/recommendation: This change is supported and aligns with Regional staff’s recommendations from Report PDL-CPL-16-55, forwarded to the Province in December 2016. Regional staff recommend allowing public comments on the forthcoming regulations that will establish who is eligible to receive planning assistance from the Support Centre.

8. Transition and Implementation Regulations

How matters that are currently before the OMB will be transitioned under the proposed new legislation will be determined through regulation. It is not known at this time if such matters will be continued and disposed under the current legislation and rules, or if there will be some time limit before the new legislation will apply.

• Comment: Transition and implementation regulations are essential to the success of the proposed legislative changes. Regional staff recommends allowing public comments on the transition and implementation regulations prior to proclamation of Bill 139 to ensure clear direction on implementation.

Proposed Changes to the Conservation Authorities Act (included in Bill 139):

#2466358 Page 10 of 22

117 117 August 22, 2017 Report: PDL-CPL-17-26/PDL-LEG-17-57

On July 20, 2015, the Province released a Discussion Paper to launch a review of the Conservation Authorities Act. The paper focused on three main aspects of conservation authorities, (1) governance, (2) funding, and (3) roles and responsibilities. Regional staff prepared a review of that document and Council forwarded Report PDL-CPL-15-51 dated October 6, 2015 to the Province as the Region’s formal response.

Subsequently, the Province analyzed feedback on the Discussion Paper and released another document titled “Conserving Our Future: Proposed Priorities for Renewal” to solicit more focused responses on five priority areas for updating the Act. Regional staff prepared a review of the Conserving Our Future document and Council forwarded Report PDL-CPL-16-40 dated September 13, 2016 to the Province as the Region’s formal response. In summary, Report PDL-CPL-15-51 and Report PDL-CPL-16-40 contained no substantive concerns with the existing Conservation Authorities Act or the proposed changes.

On May 30, 2017, the Province introduced changes to the Conservation Authorities Act as part of Bill 139. Staff comments on the proposed changes were made through the Environmental Bill of Rights Registry (EBR) on July 31, 2017 (see Attachment #1). In summary, most of the changes to the Act should be considered “housekeeping” amendments. However, some key amendments have the potential to affect municipalities such as:

1) Requiring authorities to provide certain mandatory programs and services set out in new regulations; 2) Allowing conservation authorities to recover capital costs related to their projects and operating expenses from participating municipalities set out in new regulations; and 3) Permitting an authority to enter into a memorandum of understanding with a municipality to provide programs or services.

1. Requiring authorities to provide certain mandatory programs and services set out in new regulations.

• Comment/recommendation: Distinguishing between mandated and option programs is one of the most significant changes to the Act and staff recommend that municipalities and other stakeholders be consulted on the development of the new draft regulations. The new provisions will improve clarity by establishing Provincially-mandated programs while maintaining flexibility to permit conservation authorities to carry out other valuable programs such as the Region’s Rural Water Quality Program. As the GRCA already carries out many

#2466358 Page 11 of 22

118 118 August 22, 2017 Report: PDL-CPL-17-26/PDL-LEG-17-57

of the activities listed above on behalf of the Region, staff do not anticipate major changes to programs and services as a result of these revisions to the Act.

2. Allowing conservation authorities to recover capital costs related to their projects and operating expenses from participating municipalities set out in new regulations.

Currently, the apportionment of those costs and expenses is based on a determination of the benefit each participating municipality receives from a project. The amendments provide that the apportionment will be determined in accordance with the regulations.

• Comment/recommendation: This proposed change warrants further discussion as the new regulations may impact Regional costs related to GRCA projects and operating expenses. Staff recommend that the Province consider providing funding for significant capital expenditures required by conservation authorities such as flood control facilities (e.g. dams and reservoirs). In addition, staff recommend that municipalities and other stakeholders be consulted on the development of the new draft regulations.

3. Permitting an authority to enter into a memorandum of understanding with a municipality to provide programs or services.

• Comment: This change is supported. The Region and the GRCA have a memorandum of understanding (MOU) that was established in 1996. Regional and GRCA staff are currently working on an updated MOU to better reflect current roles and responsibilities in addition to Provincial legislation and policy. Regional and GRCA staff will be discussing how the new provisions of the Act may affect revisions to the MOU.

Community Planning staff have consulted with Financial Services staff and GRCA staff and have no substantive concerns with the proposed changes to the Conservation Authorities Act. Although Regional staff continue to support changes to the Act, many of the changes are enabling in nature and will require new regulations to implement them. In the absence of these regulations, it is difficult to assess how the legislative changes will affect municipalities.

Therefore, Regional staff have requested that the Province consult with municipalities and other stakeholders on the development of new draft regulations. In addition, staff propose to monitor this process in consultation with the GRCA and report back to Council as needed.

#2466358 Page 12 of 22

119 119 August 22, 2017 Report: PDL-CPL-17-26/PDL-LEG-17-57

Corporate Strategic Plan:

This report supports strategic objectives found in the Corporate Strategic Plan, and particularly Strategic Focus Area 2: Growth Management and Prosperity.

Financial Implications:

The Region’s Community Planning Division processes a variety of development applications. This includes responsibilities delegated by the Province to the Region. Changes to the land use planning and appeal system have a direct bearing on how this process occurs, and consequently the resources required. Any financial implications would only be known following the approval of changes by the Province.

In terms of the Ontario Municipal Board (OMB), millions of dollars are spent annually by both public (municipal), private and citizen interests across Ontario. This includes legal counsel (typically with a particular subject expertise), and expert witnesses (e.g., respecting traffic, environmental impacts). Changes to the OMB could have profound effects on municipal costs, but the actual impact will only be known when changes are approved by the Province that relate to the OMB’s roles and the appeal process itself.

Other Department Consultations/Concurrence:

The GRCA has been consulted in the preparation of this report.

Attachments:

1. Table 1: Summary of Report PDL-CPL-16-55 Recommendations and Proposed Provisions in Bill 139

2. Regional Submission: Comments on Proposed Changes to the Conservation Authorities Act Environmental Bill of Rights Posting #013-0561, July 31, 2017

Prepared By: Cushla Matthews, Principal Planner

Fiona McCrea, Solicitor

Tim Van Hinte, Principal Environmental Planner

Approved By: Rod Regier, Commissioner of Planning, Development and Legislative Services

Debra Arnold, Regional Solicitor, Director of Legal Services

#2466358 Page 13 of 22

120 120 August 22, 2017 Report: PDL-CPL-17-26/PDL-LEG-17-57

Attachment 1: Table 1: Summary of Report PDL-CPL-16-55 Recommendations and Proposed Provisions in Bill 139

December 6, 2016 Report Bill 139 Provisions Staff Comment PDL-CPL-16-55 Recommendations

Theme 1: OMB Jurisdiction and Powers

Restrict appeals of planning The proposed provisions Regional staff support documents that have been restrict appeals to only these proposed provisions approved by a second those matters of as they align with approval authority (i.e., consistency with Provincial previously submitted upper tier or the Province) policies, plans, and regional feedback to the Province. official plans, or where the Minister of Municipal Affairs has identified a matter of Provincial interest that may be affected.

In addition, a proposed moratorium on amendments to official plans and secondary plans has been identified. Following approval of an official plan or secondary plan, amendments to these documents are not permitted, except through council approval to submit an amendment application.

Introduce a robust pre- The proposed Local It is expected that the screening tool to identify Planning Appeal Tribunal forthcoming regulations will appeals without merit Act makes substantial provide more detail on the changes to the practices conduct and format of

#2466358 Page 14 of 22

121 121 August 22, 2017 Report: PDL-CPL-17-26/PDL-LEG-17-57

and procedures for matters hearings, practices that have been appealed to regarding the admission of the Tribunal and how evidence, the format of certain appeals will be decisions and time lines. conducted. Regional staff recommend a public commenting period on the forthcoming regulations.

Introduce a robust process The proposed Local Regional staff support the where issues are more Planning Appeal Tribunal introduction of a mandatory clearly defined Act makes substantial case management meeting changes to the practices to identify issues more and procedures for matters clearly; this proposed that have been appealed to provision aligns with the Tribunal and how previously submitted certain appeals will be consultation feedback to conducted. the Province.

Enhance Provincial This recommendation was It is expected that the participation in OMB not specifically addressed forthcoming regulations will hearings that deal with in the proposed provisions provide more detail on the matters of provincial of Bill 139. conduct and format of interest hearings, practices regarding the admission of evidence, the format of decisions and time lines.

Limit use of “De Novo” The proposed provisions do Regional staff support this hearings limit the use of “De Novo” proposed provision as it hearings and specifically aligns with previously restricts appeals to only submitted feedback to the those matters with a lack of Province. conformity to Provincial plans, policies, regional official plans, and where the Minister of Municipal Affairs has identified a matter of Provincial interest that may be affected.

#2466358 Page 15 of 22

122 122 August 22, 2017 Report: PDL-CPL-17-26/PDL-LEG-17-57

Theme 2: Citizen Participation and Local Perspective

Increase the public A Local Planning Appeal Regional staff support this understanding of Support Centre (the Centre) proposed provision as it participating in an OMB is proposed through Bill aligns with previously hearing 139. This Centre will submitted feedback to the provide support services to Province. those eligible (established through forthcoming regulations) on matters regarding the Planning Act and the jurisdiction of LPAT. The intent is for the Centre to provide technical advice to those who have questions regarding the appeal process and how to effectively participate.

Expand the scope of the See above re: Local Regional staff support this Citizen Liaison Office Planning Appeal Support proposed provision as it and/or introduce qualified Centre aligns with previously OMB case managers submitted feedback to the Regarding case managers, Province. this recommendation was not specifically addressed in the proposed provisions of Bill 139.

Continue to enhance online This recommendation was N/A presence and ease of not specifically addressed website navigation in the proposed provisions of Bill 139.

Theme 3: Clear and Predictable Decision-Making

Develop a consistent set of Bill 139 proposes that Local It is expected that the criteria for oral and written Planning Appeals Tribunal forthcoming regulations will decisions by Ontario give greater weight to the provide more detail on the Municipal Board members municipal process and conduct and format of written submissions. hearings, practices However, this specific regarding the admission of

#2466358 Page 16 of 22

123 123 August 22, 2017 Report: PDL-CPL-17-26/PDL-LEG-17-57

recommendation was not evidence, the format of specifically addressed in decisions and time lines, the proposed provisions of which may further address Bill 139 this recommendation.

Regional staff recommend a public commenting period on the forthcoming regulations

Ensure appropriate This recommendation was See above experience and transparent not specifically addressed training for OMB members in the proposed provisions of Bill 139.

Increase compensation and This recommendation was See above length of appointments for not specifically addressed OMB members in the proposed provisions of Bill 139.

Establish clear and This recommendation was See above consistent rules for the use not specifically addressed of multi-member panels in the proposed provisions of Bill 139.

Theme 4: Modern Procedures and Faster Decisions

Encourage OMB members This recommendation was N/A to interact more fully in the not specifically addressed hearing process in the proposed provisions of Bill 139.

Use technology to improve Bill 139 proposes to give Regional staff support this efficiency and timely the Local Planning Appeals proposed provision as it processes Tribunal authority to aligns with previously conduct hearings that are submitted feedback to the alternatives to traditional Province. adjudicative or adversarial procedures. For example, holding hearings or other proceedings in writing or by any electronic means (i.e.,

#2466358 Page 17 of 22

124 124 August 22, 2017 Report: PDL-CPL-17-26/PDL-LEG-17-57

teleconference).

Theme 5: Alternative Dispute Resolution and Fewer Hearings

Triage appeals according to Regarding triaging appeals, It is expected that the type and complexity Bill 139 proposes a forthcoming regulations will mandatory case provide more detail on the management conference conduct and format of between parties for all hearings, practices official plan, zoning by-law, regarding the admission of and/or plans of subdivision. evidence, the format of decisions and time lines, which may further address this recommendation.

Regional staff recommend a public commenting period on the forthcoming regulations

#2466358 Page 18 of 22

125 125 August 22, 2017 Report: PDL-CPL-17-26/PDL-LEG-17-57

Attachment 2: Regional Submission: Comments on Proposed Changes to the Conservation Authorities Act Environmental Bill of Rights Posting #013-0561, July 31, 2017

#2466358 Page 19 of 22

126 126 August 22, 2017 Report: PDL-CPL-17-26/PDL-LEG-17-57

#2466358 Page 20 of 22

127 127 August 22, 2017 Report: PDL-CPL-17-26/PDL-LEG-17-57

#2466358 Page 21 of 22

128 128 August 22, 2017 Report: PDL-CPL-17-26/PDL-LEG-17-57

#2466358 Page 22 of 22

129 129

Report: TES-DCS-17-17 Region of Waterloo Transportation and Environmental Services Design and Construction

To: Chair Tom Galloway and Members of the Planning and Works Committee

Date: August 22, 2017 File Code: 05386.H

Subject: Class Environmental Assessment Study Weber Street Improvements, Northfield Drive to Blythwood Road, City of Waterloo

Recommendation:

Summary:

The Region of Waterloo is currently undertaking a Class Environmental Assessment (Class EA) Study to consider improvements to Weber Street from Northfield Drive to Blythwood Road in the City of Waterloo. Please refer to Appendix “A” for a Key Plan of the Study Area.

This Class EA Study is being directed by a “Project Team” consisting of staff from the Region of Waterloo, the City of Waterloo, the Region’s engineering consultant Stantec Consulting Ltd., and City of Waterloo Councillor Angela Vieth.

A Public Consultation Centre was held on November 8, 2016 to receive public input. Comments received at the Public Consultation Centre are included in Appendix “C” of this report and the Project Team’s response to the comments received is included in Appendix “D” of this report. Based on a review of the technical information gathered for this project as well as a review of all public and agency comments received, the Project Team is now recommending that Regional Council approve the following improvements for Weber Street from Northfield Drive to Blythwood Road in the City of Waterloo:

• Reconstruct Weber Street within the project limits; 2415036 Page 1 of 30 130 130 August 22, 2017 Report: TES-DCS-17-17

• Replace the storm sewers within the project limits; • Rehabilitate the Weber Street bridge over the Waterloo Spur/ION tracks; • Replace the Cedar Creek culvert crossing Weber Street; • Construct new designated left-turn lanes on Weber Street northbound at Albert Street, Parkside Drive and Glen Forrest Boulevard; • Construct new designated left-turn lanes southbound on Weber Street at Parkside Drive, Dutton Drive and Albert Street; • Construct a 3.0 metre wide boulevard multi-use trail on the east side of Weber Street from Parkside Drive to 75m south of Schaefer Street; • Construct a 1.5 metre wide reserved on-road cycling lane on the west side of Weber Street from Northfield Drive to Blythwood Road; and • Construct a 1.5 metre wide on road cycling lane on the east side of Weber Street from Northfield Drive to Parkside Drive and from Albert Street to Blythwood Road; • Install new streetlights on the Weber Street bridge over the Waterloo Spur/ION tracks; and • Plant new boulevard trees and landscaping where appropriate and feasible.

The Recommended Design Alternative provides the required capacity for long-term traffic needs on this section of Weber Street, improves traffic operations and provides enhanced active transportation facilities as recommended in the Region’s Active Transportation Master Plan.

Staff is now also recommending that Regional Council direct staff to file the Notice of Completion for this Class Environmental Assessment Study by means of advertisements in local newspapers and mailings to adjacent property owners, tenants and agencies, and place the Project File on public record for a period of thirty (30) days.

The estimated cost for design and construction of the road improvements to Weber Street from Northfield Drive to Blythwood Road is $9,300,000 to be funded from the Roads Rehabilitation Reserve Fund ($8,920,000) and cycling facility improvements to be funded from the Development Charges Reserve Fund ($380,000). Construction is currently scheduled for 2020 and 2021 in the Region’s 10-year Transportation Capital Program.

Letters advising of the recommendations contained in this Report TES-DCS-17-17 were mailed to all agencies and those who attended the November 8, 2016 Public Consultation Centre, and mailed to all owners/residents abutting the Weber Street project limits during the week of July 31, 2017.

Report:

1.0 Background

2415036 Page 2 of 30 131 131 August 22, 2017 Report: TES-DCS-17-17

The Region of Waterloo is currently undertaking a Class Environmental Assessment (Class EA) Study to consider road improvements to Weber Street from Blythwood Road to Northfield Drive in the City of Waterloo. Please refer to Appendix “A” for a Key Plan of the Study Area.

This Class EA Study has been initiated by the Region to address several needs on Weber Street. The section of Weber Street between Blythwood Road and Northfield Drive is in need of improvements to address its deteriorating infrastructure, including the pavement structure, the bridge over the Waterloo Spur/ION tracks, the Cedar Creek culvert south of Albert Street and the storm sewers. This project is classified as a Schedule “B” undertaking in accordance with the Municipal Class Environmental Assessment planning process which requires consultation with potentially affected stakeholders, including the public and various agencies, and consideration of alternative design options as part of the planning process. The planning of these roadway improvements is being undertaken in accordance with the Region’s Transportation Master Plan, the Region’s Active Transportation Master Plan, the Regional Context Sensitive Transportation Corridor Design Guidelines and other relevant Regional and City of Waterloo policies and guidelines. The reconstruction of Weber Street also provides an opportunity to consider potential improvements for cyclists, pedestrians and transit as part of the project planning.

2.0 Corridor Features

Within the Study Area, Weber Street is constructed as a four (4) lane urban roadway with curbs on each side of the roadway. The existing right-of way is generally 25 metres wide, increasing to 55 metres wide where the Weber Street bridge crosses the Waterloo Spur/ION tracks between Parkside Drive and Dutton Drive.

Within the Study Area, Weber Street and Northfield Drive are under the jurisdiction of the Region of Waterloo. Existing local intersecting streets under the jurisdiction of the City of Waterloo include Glen Forrest Boulevard, Parkside Drive, Dutton Drive, Albert Street, Belcan Place, Schaeffer Street and Blythwood Road. The posted speed limit on this section of Weber Street is 60 km/h.

Weber Street is classified as a Neighbourhood Connector – Avenue in the Region’s Context Sensitive Corridor Design Guidelines. Neighbourhood Connectors are designed to support active transportation (including walking and cycling) and transit. They can prioritize vehicular traffic, but need to support a mix of adjacent land uses that typically require individual access to and from the road.

2415036 Page 3 of 30 132 132 August 22, 2017 Report: TES-DCS-17-17

Existing utilities along Weber Street within the study limits include Regional storm sewers, City of Waterloo sanitary sewers, City of Waterloo watermains, overhead power lines, and local gas mains.

Cedar Creek crosses under Weber Street between Albert Street and Belcan place through an existing corrugated metal culvert with gabion basket head walls at both ends. This culvert is in poor condition and is in need of rehabilitation or replacement.

Currently there are no cycling facilities along this section of Weber Street. Reserved on- road cycling lanes exist on Parkside Drive to the east and west of Weber Street as well as on Weber Street to the north of Northfield Drive. Proposed reserved on-road cycling lanes are scheduled for construction in 2018 on Weber Street to the south of Blythwood Road. There are existing 1.5 metre wide concrete sidewalks on the west side of Weber Street from Northfield Drive to Blythwood Road and on the east side of Weber Street from Northfield Drive to Belcan Place. There is also an existing asphalt multi-use trail (Waterloop trail) on Albert Street that terminates at Weber Street.

Abutting properties are a mix of commercial, residential and institutional properties. Construction of the proposed improvements will be confined to the roadway corridor and is therefore not expected to adversely impact any abutting properties.

The existing bridge over the Waterloo Spur/ION tracks is approximately sixty (60) years old and is in need of rehabilitation. Since it would be very costly and challenging to widen this bridge, particularly as the ION will be in operation during the reconstruction of Weber Street, the fixed width of the bridge presents a constraint in terms of adding enhanced pedestrian and cycling features as part of the project.

3.0 Transportation Study

A detailed Transportation Study was completed as part of this Class EA Study. The purpose of the Transportation Study was to examine existing traffic operations within the study area, forecast future traffic volumes to the year 2031 and identify transportation needs for accommodating forecasted traffic volumes and improving traffic operations.

The Transportation Study recommended providing new designated left-turn lanes on Weber Street at its intersections with Albert Street, Parkside Drive, Glen Forrest Boulevard and Dutton Drive.

In order to avoid planning options requiring the widening of the existing bridge over the Waterloo Spur/ION track, the Transportation Study also assessed the feasibility of eliminating through lanes in either the northbound or southbound direction of travel, thereby providing more room within the roadway platform to accommodate facilities for pedestrians and cyclists. The Transportation Study found that removal of a through lane of traffic on Weber Street in each direction, thereby reducing Weber Street from a 2415036 Page 4 of 30 133 133 August 22, 2017 Report: TES-DCS-17-17

four (4) lane to a two (2) lane roadway within the Study Area, would result in an acceptable level of traffic operations under forecast 2031 traffic volumes. However, removal of one or more through lanes of traffic would increase travel times for motorists and result in marginal traffic operations at some intersections.

4.0 Design Alternatives

Based on all identified needs and objectives for Weber Street, including the recommendations in the Transportation Study, the Region’s Transportation Master Plan, the Region’s Active Transportation Master Plan, the Region’s Context Sensitive Corridor Design Guidelines for a Neighbourhood Connector – Avenue, the Project Team initially developed a series of preliminary design alternatives for improvements to Weber Street. These design alternatives were all developed to avoid widening the existing bridge over the Waterloo Spur/ION tracks. Please refer to Appendix “B” for drawings of all Design Alternatives developed by the Project Team in advance of the Public Consultation Centre.

These four (4) Design Alternatives presented at the Public Consultation Centre are described as follows:

Design Alternative 1

“Do Nothing” (Reconstruct the road in it’s current configuration)

Design Alternative 2

4 Through Lanes including:

• on-road cycling lanes on each side of the roadway • new designated left-turn lanes at Albert Street, Parkside Drive, and Glen Forrest Boulevard • a new 3.0 metre wide boulevard multi-use trail on the east side of the road from Albert Street to the Waterloo Inn property (no sidewalk on the west side of the road from Albert Street to Parkside Drive)

Design Alternative 3

2 Through Lanes from Albert Street to Parkside Drive including :

• on-road cycling lanes on each side of the roadway • retain two (2) through lanes in each direction from Northfield Drive to Parkside Drive and from Albert Street to Blythwood Road • new designated left-turn lanes at Albert Street, Parkside Drive, Dutton Drive and Glen Forrest Road • new 3.0 metre wide boulevard multi-use trail on the east side of road from Parkside Drive to the Waterloo Inn property. 2415036 Page 5 of 30 134 134 August 22, 2017 Report: TES-DCS-17-17

Design Alternative 4

3 Through Lanes from Albert Street to Parkside Drive including:

• on-road cycling lanes on each side of the roadway • retain two (2) through lanes in each direction from Northfield Drive to Parkside Drive and from Albert Street to and Blythwood Road • 2 northbound through lanes and 1 southbound through lane from Albert Street to Parkside Drive • new designated left-turn lanes at Albert Street, Parkside Drive, Dutton Drive and Glen Forrest Road, • new 3.0 metre wide boulevard multi-use trail on the east side of road from Albert Street to the Waterloo Inn property.

5.0 Public & Stakeholder Consultation

Prior to the Public Consultation Centre, the design alternatives were evaluated by the Project Team according to the following criteria:

Transportation/Traffic

How does the alternative affect traffic capacity, traffic operations and access to abutting properties? How does the alternative facilitate cycling and pedestrian travel?

Natural Environment

How does the design alternative affect the natural environment, including trees, watercourses, wildlife and air quality?

Social Environment

How does the design alternative affect abutting properties? How does the design alternative provide for enhanced landscape and/or streetscape opportunities?

Technical

How does the design alternative affect winter snow clearing operations? What is the extent of the impacts on existing municipal services and/or utilities for the alternative? What is the preliminary construction cost estimate?

Based on this preliminary evaluation of the design alternatives using the above noted criteria, Design Alternative No. 4 was presented by the Project Team as being preferred by the Project Team at this Public Consultation Centre, in part because Design Alternative No. 4 provided the following advantages:

• Design Alternative No. 4 aligns with the Region’s Active Transportation Master Plan; 2415036 Page 6 of 30 135 135 August 22, 2017 Report: TES-DCS-17-17

• On-road cycling lanes are provided in both directions; • Sidewalks are retained in both directions; • Two (2) lanes of traffic are maintained in the northbound direction throughout the corridor; • Designated left-turn lanes are provided northbound at Albert Street, Parkside Drive and Glen Forrest Boulevard; • Designated left-turn lanes are provided southbound at Parkside Drive, Dutton Drive and Albert Street; and • A 3.0m wide boulevard multi-use trail is provided from Albert Street to 75m south of Schaeffer Street to continue the City of Waterloo’s Waterloop trail.

Please refer to Appendix “C” for a summary of the Project Team’s preliminary evaluation of the design alternatives.

A Public Consultation Centre was held at the Wing 404 Rotary Adult Centre, 510 Dutton Drive in the City of Waterloo on Tuesday November 8, 2016 from 5:00 p.m. to 8:00 p.m. Plans showing the Project Team’s design alternatives were on display with Project Team representatives present to answer questions and to receive feedback from members of the public. Approximately fifty (50) members of the public attended the Public Consultation Centre with forty-three (43) guests singing the attendance register. Nine (9) comment sheets, one (1) phone call and three (3) emails were received. Please refer to Appendix “D” for a summary of the comments received.

The design alternatives were presented to the Region’s Active Transportation Advisory Committee on October 18, 2016. The ATAC expressed general support of the inclusion of enhanced pedestrian and cycling facilities.

6.0 Public Feedback and Revised Design Alternative

The Project Team received primarily positive feedback from the public on many of the proposed design elements presented. However, there was a widespread lack of support from the public for the removal of any through lanes on Weber Street. There was support for the inclusion of enhanced cycling facilities and suggestions to extend the limits of the multi-use trail from Albert Street to Northfield Drive.

Comments received from the November 8, 2016 Public Consultation Centre are included in Appendix “D”. The Project Team’s response to these comments is included in Appendix “E”.

Based on a thorough review of the feedback received from members of the public and the Region of Waterloo’s Active Transportation Advisory Committee (ATAC), the Project Team developed a modified version of Design Alternative No. 2 for consideration.

Modified Design Alternative No. 2 consists of:

2415036 Page 7 of 30 136 136 August 22, 2017 Report: TES-DCS-17-17

• Retaining two (2) through lanes of traffic in each direction on Weber Street from Northfield Drive to Blythwood Road; • New designated left-turn lanes northbound at Albert Street, Parkside Drive and Glen Forrest Boulevard; • New designated left-turn lanes southbound at Parkside Drive, Dutton Drive and Albert Street; • A new 3.0 metre wide boulevard multi-use trail on the east side of Weber Street from Parkside Drive to 75m south of Schaefer Street; • A new 1.5 metre wide reserved on-road cycling lane on the west side of Weber Street from Northfield Drive to Blythwood Road and a new 1.5m wide on road cycling lane on the east side of Weber Street from Northfield Drive to Parkside Drive and from Albert Street to Blythwood Road;

Please refer to Appendix “F” for a drawing of Modified Design Alternative No. 2

On March 28th, 2017, The Region distributed a letter to all stakeholders and members of the public who requested to be added to the project mailing list. This correspondence summarized the feedback received through the Public Consultation Centre held on November 8th, 2016 and described the Project Team’s new Modified Design Alternative No. 2 as the new Preferred Design Alternative for the improvements to Weber Street. Drawings of Modified Design Alternative No. 2 were available for viewing on the Region’s website and stakeholders and members of the public were provided the opportunity to comment on Modified Design Alternative No. 2. One (1) email was received. Please refer to Appendix “G” for a summary of the written comments received and the Project Team’s response to these comments.

7.0 Recommended Design Alternative

Based on a review of the technical information gathered for this project as well as a review of all public comments received, the Project Team is now recommending that Regional Council approve the following improvements (described as Modified Design Alternative No. 2) for Weber Street from Northfield Drive to Blythwood Road in the City of Waterloo:

• Reconstruct Weber Street within the project limits; • Replace the storm sewers within the project limits; • Rehabilitate the Weber Street bridge over the Waterloo Spur/ION tracks; • Replace the Cedar Creek culvert crossing Weber Street; • Construct new designated left-turn lanes on Weber Street northbound at Albert Street, Parkside Drive and Glen Forrest Boulevard; • Construct new designated left-turn lanes southbound on Weber Street at Parkside Drive, Dutton Drive and Albert Street; • Construct a 3.0 metre wide boulevard multi-use trail on the east side of Weber 2415036 Page 8 of 30 137 137 August 22, 2017 Report: TES-DCS-17-17

Street from Parkside Drive to 75m south of Schaefer Street; • Construct a 1.5 metre wide reserved on-road cycling lane on the west side of Weber Street from Northfield Drive to Blythwood Road; and • Construct a 1.5 metre wide on road cycling lane on the east side of Weber Street from Northfield Drive to Parkside Drive and from Albert Street to Blythwood Road; • Install new streetlights on the Weber Street bridge over the Waterloo Spur/ION tracks; and • Plant new boulevard trees and landscaping where appropriate and feasible.

Please refer to Appendix “F” for a drawing of the Project Team’s Recommended Design Alternative for Weber Street. Implementation of the Project Team’s proposed improvements will require that small parcels of property be obtained from approximately ten (10) property owners abutting Weber Street.

The Project Team’s Recommended Design Alternative is scheduled to be presented to the City of Waterloo Advisory Committee on Active Transportation on June 13, 2017.

Staff is now also recommending that Regional Council direct staff to file the Notice of Completion for this Class Environmental Assessment Study by means of advertisements in local newspapers and mailings to adjacent property owners, tenants and agencies and place the Project File on public record for a period of thirty (30) days.

8.0 Benefits of the Recommended Design Alternative

The Project Team believes that the Recommended Design Alternative provides the following benefits:

• Maintaining two (2) though lanes of traffic in each direction on this section of Weber Street will provide the required capacity for the long-term traffic needs on this section of Weber Street; • Construction of new designated left-turn lanes on Weber Street at Albert Street, Dutton Drive, Parkside Drive and Glen Forrest Boulevard will reduce traffic delays and increase safety; • Construction of a 3.0 metre wide boulevard multi-use trail on the east side of Weber Street from Parkside Drive to 75 metres south of Schaefer Street and a 1.5 metre wide on road cycling lanes on the west side of Weber Street will improve facilities for cyclists, pedestrians and other users, improve connectivity with existing and planned City of Waterloo trails and fully aligns with the Region’s Active Transportation Master Plan;

9.0 Project Cost

The total estimated cost for the proposed Weber Street improvements including

2415036 Page 9 of 30 138 138 August 22, 2017 Report: TES-DCS-17-17

engineering, construction, utility relocation, property acquisition and other project costs is $9,300,000.

The City of Waterloo will be responsible for a portion of the costs associated with the replacement and upgrade of the storm sewers within the project limits.

10.0 Project Timing

Construction of the Weber Street improvements is currently schedule to be completed in 2020 and 2021 in the Region’s 10-Year Transportation Capital Program. The timing of this project is subject to receipt of all technical and financial approvals, acquisition of the required property and final approval of Regional Council.

11.0 Traffic Management During Construction

The reconstruction of Weber Street from Northfield Drive to Blythwood Road is planned to be completed by generally maintaining one (1) through lane of traffic in each direction plus left-turn lanes at intersections where feasible. Traffic may be reduced to one (1) lane for short periods requiring flagging operations to maintain two-way traffic. Replacement of the Cedar Creek culvert may require that Weber Street be fully closed to traffic for up to ten (10) weeks. The need for a full closure and alternatives to maintain traffic or minimize the duration of the closure will be investigated during detailed design.

12.0 Next Steps

Subject to Regional Council approval of the Recommended Design Alternative, a Notice of Completion will be filed for this project by means of mail-outs and advertised notices; and the Project File, which will include all relevant documentation regarding the planning and decision-making process, will be placed on the public record for a minimum mandatory period of thirty (30) days. During this thirty (30) day filing period, any party may object to the Recommended Design Alternative by requesting the Ministry of Environment and Climate Change grant a Part “II” Order requesting that the project subject to a full environmental assessment. A request for a full environmental assessment must be made in writing to the Minister of Environment and Climate Change with a copy to the Region’s Commissioner of Transportation and Environmental Services. When the thirty (30) day public filing has expired and if no requests for a full environmental assessment are received by the Minister within that thirty (30) days, the Recommended Design Alternative will be considered approved for implementation.

Subject to Regional Council approval of the Recommended Design Alternative, this Class EA Study will be completed and filed in July 2017 with detailed design commencing in September 2017.

Letters advising of the recommendations contained in this Report TES-DCS-17-17 Were mailed out during the week of July 31, 2017 to all agencies, owners/residents

2415036 Page 10 of 30 139 139 August 22, 2017 Report: TES-DCS-17-17

abutting the Weber Street project limits and those who attended the November 8, 2016 Public Consultation Centre.

Corporate Strategic Plan:

The project is in harmony with the Region’s 2015 – 2018 Corporate Strategic Plan in that the implementation of the Weber Street Improvements aligns with Focus Area 2.3 to build infrastructure for and increase participation in, active forms of transportation (cycling and walking), and Focus Area 2.4 to optimize road capacity to safely manage traffic and congestion.

Financial Implications:

The Region’s approved 2017 Ten Year Transportation Capital Program includes $9,300,000 in Project 05386 Weber Street from Albert Street to Northfield Drive and Project 07307 Weber Street Blythwood Road to Albert Street for design and construction of the improvements to Weber Street from Northfield Drive to Blythwood Road, including property acquisitions, utilities, road construction, storm sewer, box culverts and engineering all be funded from the Roads Rehabilitation Reserve Fund ($8,920,000). The on-road cycling lanes and boulevard multi-use trail are to be funded from the Development Charges Reserve Fund ($380,000).

City of Waterloo staff have confirmed that the City will take responsibility for maintenance and replacement of the boulevard multi-use trail.

Other Department Consultations/Concurrence:

Nil

Attachments

Appendix “A” Key Plan

Appendix “B” Drawings of Design Alternatives

Appendix “C” Preliminary Evaluation of Design Alternatives

Appendix “D” Written Comments Received from the November 8, 2016 Public Consultation Centre

Appendix “E” Project Team Responses to Comments Received from the November 8, 2016 Public Consultation Centre

Appendix “F” Drawing of Modified Design Alternative No. 2

Appendix “G” Written Comments Received from the March 28, 2017 notification letter regarding Modified Design Alternative No. 2 and Project 2415036 Page 11 of 30 140 140 August 22, 2017 Report: TES-DCS-17-17

Team Response to Comments

Prepared By: Dave Brown, Transportation Project Manager

Approved By: Thomas Schmidt, Commissioner Transportation and Environmental Services

2415036 Page 12 of 30 141 141 August 22, 2017 Report: TES-DCS-17-17

APPENDIX “A” – Key Plan

2415036 Page 13 of 30 142 August 22, 2017 Report: TES-DCS-17-17 142

APPENDIX “B” – Drawings of Design Alternatives

Drawing of Design Alternative No. 1 “Do Nothing”

2415036 Page 14 of 30 143 August 22, 2017 Report: TES-DCS-17-17 143

Drawing of Design Alternative No. 2 “4 Lanes with Bike Lanes”

2415036 Page 15 of 30 144 August 22, 2017 Report: TES-DCS-17-17 144

Drawing of Design Alternative No. 3 “2 Lanes on Bridge Deck with Bike Lanes”

2415036 Page 16 of 30 145 August 22, 2017 Report: TES-DCS-17-17 145

Drawing of Design Alternative No. 4 “3 Lanes on Bridge Deck with Bike Lanes”

2415036 Page 17 of 30 146 146 August 22, 2017 Report: TES-DCS-17-17

APPENDIX “C” - Preliminary Evaluation of Design Alternatives

2415036 Page 18 of 30 147 147 August 22, 2017 Report: TES-DCS-17-17

2415036 Page 19 of 30 148 148 August 22, 2017 Report: TES-DCS-17-17

2415036 Page 20 of 30 149 149 August 22, 2017 Report: TES-DCS-17-17

APPENDIX “D”

Written Comments from the November 8, 2016 Public Consultation Centre

Attendee - Comments Stephen - Cycling on Weber Street is currently unsafe, and agrees with cycle lanes, but not as shown. - Prefers a Multi-Use Trail the full length of project. Note: Attendee did not - If a full length MUT is not possible, then consider a MUT indicate a preferred from Parkside Drive northerly. design alternative. - If MUTs are not possible, provide segregated on-road cycle lanes, which are much safer. Doreen (PCC) - Extend contract on Northfield Drive to match limits of LRT. - Weber Street should be kept as 4 lanes between Dutton Drive and Parkside Drive. - Questions need for sidewalks on both sides of Weber Note: Attendee did not Street; have there been pedestrian counts? indicate a preferred - Is it possible to provide a bus “pullover” on Parkside Drive; design alternative. with no pullover, traffic cannot get past stopped buses. - Preferred design appears over-complicated, with various lane shifts along the corridor. - Traffic deficiencies make no note of Parkside intersection; are there no deficiencies at this location? - Are there more recent traffic counts other than 2013? - Bike lanes should be separate from traffic lanes. - Why is it proposed to narrow a section of Weber Street in Waterloo when a major widening just occurred on Weber in Kitchener

Doreen (Email) - If rehabilitation is being considered for bridge, then why can’t widening be included? - No justification has been provided for designated left turn lanes; Why not do advanced tests with advanced left turn signals? - PCC Handout indicates that Weber Street has been identified as a “Core Cycling Route”. What does this mean? - Weber Street is a “Neighborhood Connector Avenue” that should support Active Transportation modes. Although this may be desired, other more feasible options could be considered. - If traffic data is based on 2016 counts, data may be skewed due to ongoing LRT construction which has disrupted normal traffic movements - Are the trucks entering Dutton Drive coming from the north or from the south? If from the south, is there enough room to turn without encroaching on the inside lane of Weber Street? 2415036 Page 21 of 30 150 150 August 22, 2017 Report: TES-DCS-17-17

Attendee - Comments - The PCC did not provide future truck data, types, or sizes. Malcolm & Linda Comments on Design Alternative 4: - At Parkside Drive southbound, provide 2 lanes through Note: Attendee did not intersection with taper on south side of intersection (Noted indicate a preferred failure of this design at Westmount and Glasgow in design alternative. Kitchener). - Leave 2 lanes southbound over bridge. - Median island on Weber Street at Glen Forrest Blvd. is not needed or should be shortened. - Eliminate bus stop on Parkside west of intersection, as 2 lanes are needed going westbound. - One lane in SB direction will block drivers who cannot get up the hill in winter. - Questions the need to purchase land for left turn lanes at intersections. - Trucks turning from Parkside westbound onto Weber southbound will have difficulty entering a single lane with the median island constricting turns.

Comments on Design Alternative 3: - Does not like sacrificing traffic lanes for both bike lanes and a MUT (2 choices for bicycles…why?). John - Provide the southbound taper of Weber Street, from 4 lanes to 2 lanes, south of Parkside Drive and not on the approach Note: Attendee to the intersection (Design as shown on Alternative 2). indicated a Preference for Design Concept 4, with some features of Alternative 2.

Jan - Need turning lanes and advance green signals at Parkside Drive and Albert Street, as traffic is heavy. Note: Attendee - Advance Green for Left turns is especially important at indicated a Preference Parkside northbound as it is difficult to turn into residential for Design Alternative neighborhood. 4. Trudy - Questions why Weber Street was widened between Guelph Street and Frederick Street when the current proposal is to Note: Attendee narrow this section of Weber Street. indicated a preference - Narrowing Weber Street will drive away business for Design Alternative investment in the area due to traffic impacts. Lane 2 reductions will also impact traffic on Market days and during Oktoberfest. - Supports Left Turn lanes where feasible. - Alternative Design Concept is unreasonably complicated and will add to accidents. 2415036 Page 22 of 30 151 151 August 22, 2017 Report: TES-DCS-17-17

Attendee - Comments - In addition to maintaining 4 lanes, Region should also widen Weber Street all the way to King Street North, by the St. Jacob’s Market. - “Do-Nothing” would be better than Alternatives 3 and 4.

Tom - Prefers Alternative 2 because he doesn’t cycle over the bridge. - Suggests Trial Runs of Alternatives 3 and 4 by use of Note: Attendee temporary TC 54 barriers to see how traffic moves, during indicated a preference summer and during the fall when schools are back in for Design Alternative September. 2, followed by Alternatives 4 and 3 (in order).

Ken - For Alternative 4, do traffic studies show that traffic southbound as less than half of northbound traffic, which Note: Attendee did not would seem to be the obvious litmus test to support a lane indicate a preferred reduction? design alternative. - Suggestion that southbound traffic will grow faster than normal population growth, because of no planned expansion of the Expressway. - Suggests a possible field “Beta Test” to measure impacts of lane reductions (Alternatives 3 and 4) before a final decision is made. - With King Street capacity lost due to LRT, Weber Street remains one of the main north-south alternatives to the expressway, on the east side of the city. It doesn’t make sense to reduce the roadway to one lane southbound in favour of cycling lanes. - Suggests possible center lane shifts during AM and PM peak hours to account for varying volumes, but admits to problems with this concept. - Suggests the use of MUTs along the corridor and eliminating the cycle lanes, which would provide the space needed for 4 lanes across the bridge. Faye and Edward - Active residents of the area for over 35 years and are very familiar with the local traffic movements. Note: Attendees - Creating Bike lanes is a great idea, but they must make indicated a preference sense. for Design Alternative - Bike lanes plus Multi-Use Trails in the same corridor does 2. not make sense and is a costly waste of taxpayer dollars. Choose one but not both. - Consider the student population in the area (St. David’s; Milford Avenue Public School, Universities. - The loss of a sidewalk (Alternative 2) on the west side of

2415036 Page 23 of 30 152 152 August 22, 2017 Report: TES-DCS-17-17

Attendee - Comments Weber, between Albert and Blythwood, makes no sense. - The addition of Left Turn lanes at Parkside are long overdue. - Disagree with single southbound lane over the bridge, as one stalled vehicle will cause serious backups of traffic. - It makes no sense to sacrifice traffic lanes for a multi-use trail or for dual bike lanes. Daniel - Attendee is an active and experienced cyclist, and is, therefore, excited to see cycling infrastructure planned for Note: Attendee Weber Street. indicated a preference - High traffic volumes on this section of roadway warrants for Design Alternative separate cycle lanes for the safety of cyclists, especially 3. over the bridge. - Acknowledges that on-road cycle lanes will not attract most cyclists from the sidewalk to the bike lane, because of the traffic volumes and trucks, so the inclusion of MUTs would also be a good idea. - Recognizing the corridor width constraints and the fact that segregated bike lanes are not practical (although preferred), prefers Alternative 3 because of additional space across bridge for both MUTs (inexperienced cyclists) and Bike Lanes (experienced and confident cyclists). - Recommends Cross-Ride markings at Albert Street intersection in place of traditional cross walk markings. Gerry - Further to telephone conversation with Dave Brown, owner will not consent to any more land acquisitions in front of his Note: Attendee did not property at 500 Weber Street. indicate a preferred - Advised that land was conceded in 2002 (Survey L-5501 design alternative. and R-Plan 58R-13660) for the purposes of widening Weber Street. - Also advised that payment was provided for the signalized intersection at Albert Street as part of the entrance reconstruction at 500 Weber Street. - Any changes to the current configuration should trigger a reimbursement of previous costs paid by the owner. Barry - Alternatives 3 and 4 will result in “gridlock” during rush hour periods. They are both not feasible, as traffic would not Note: Attendee move across the bridge. indicated a preference - There does not appear to be any justification for reducing for Design Alternative lanes on the bridge, other than money. 2 - Is there any study data confirming that one lane would not cause traffic problems?

2415036 Page 24 of 30 153 153 August 22, 2017 Report: TES-DCS-17-17

APPENDIX “E”

Project Team Responses to Comments Received from the November 8, 2016 Public Consultation Centre

Approximately fifty (50) members of the public attended the Public Consultation Centre with forty-three (43) guests singing the attendance register. Several of these guests were not residents (consultants or City staff). Written responses were received from 12 residents and/or business owners following the November 8, 2016 Public Consultation Centre. A portion of the responses were presented on the forms provided at the PCC while others were submitted via email after the meeting. Two of the comment submissions were provided by couples while all other comment submissions were from individuals. The main comments received at the Public Consultation Centre and the Project Team’s response to these comments is summarized as follows:

Comment No. 1 – Comments Regarding Proposed Lane Reductions

Summary of Comments

• Seven (7) comments received suggested that a lane reduction between Parkside Drive and Dutton Drive will not serve the best interests of the community. A lane reduction will result in “rush hour gridlock”, contends one attendee. Also, “where is the study data confirming that one lane would not cause traffic problems”? • A southbound traffic lane should not be sacrificed in favour of a bike lane or MUT as traffic will continue to grow on Weber Street. • Why did the Region recently widen a section of Weber Street in Kitchener and is now considering narrowing a busy section of Weber Street? • Narrowing Weber Street will “drive away business investment in the area”. • Two residents suggested a “trial run” of a single SB lane across the bridge before the Region conclusively adopts a “road diet” plan. • In addition to retaining 4 lanes, Weber Street should be widened adjacent to the St. Jacob’s Farmers Market.

Project Team Response

Following the Public Consultation Centre, the Project Team reviewed the findings of the Transportation Study and confirmed that Design Alternatives No. 3 and No. 4, which include lane reductions, would provide an acceptable level-of-service for traffic operations on Weber Street based on 2031 forecast traffic volumes. The elimination of through lanes would, however, increase travel times and increase traffic congestion to some extent.

In view of the feedback received from the public to maintain the existing four (4) lanes of traffic, the Project Team reconsidered Design Alternative No. 2, which maintains four (4) lanes of traffic. Following the Public Consultation Centre, the Project Team also 2415036 Page 25 of 30 154 154 August 22, 2017 Report: TES-DCS-17-17

received information from the City of Waterloo that a city trail connection is being planned from Conestoga Road to Dutton Drive, connecting to Weber Street. City staff have requested that a boulevard multi-use trail along Weber Street from Albert Street to Dutton Drive be considered to connect to this future trail. The Project Team decided to modify Design Alternative No. 2 to combine this new City of Waterloo request with the desire of the public to maintain four (4) through lanes of traffic. The Modified Design Alternative No. 2 includes the planned boulevard multi-use trail on the east side of Weber Street from Albert Street to Parkside Drive. The northbound on-road cycling lane is eliminated under Modified Design Alternative No. 2 between Albert Street and Parkside Drive as the multi-use trail accommodates both cyclists and pedestrian traffic.

Comment No. 2 – Comments Regarding Designated Left Turn Lanes

Summary of Comments

• There appeared to be general support for the proposed designated left turn lanes and/or advanced green signals at Albert Street and Parkside Drive. • One resident expressed concern about the proposed center median proposed for the designated left turn at Glen Forrest Boulevard as it may make it more difficult for large trucks to turn in this direction. • One resident objected to any land purchases for the sake of adding designated left turn lanes, while another objected to separate left turn lanes when advanced green signals may suffice.

Project Team Response

Design Alternatives No. 2, No. 3, and No. 4 all include designated left-turn lanes northbound at Albert Street, Parkside Drive and Glen Forrest Boulevard and designated left-turn lanes southbound at Parkside Drive, Dutton Drive and Albert Street to improve traffic operations and increase safety. The Recommended Design Alterative also includes designated left-turn lanes at these same locations.

The Project Team reviewed the properties that would be affected by the addition of these designated left turn lanes and concluded that none of these properties would be adversely affected by the acquisition of the small parcels of land required to construct the cycling facilities and designated left turn lanes.

Comment No. 3 – Bike Lanes, Multi-Use Trails, and Sidewalks

Summary of Comments

• Reaction to on-road bike lanes versus off-road cycling and multi-use trails was mixed, with 6 out of 11 respondents commenting in some form. • Two respondents suggested that on-road cycling lanes should be separated from traffic lanes, if possible. Alternatively, provide multi-use trails as they are safer 2415036 Page 26 of 30 155 155 August 22, 2017 Report: TES-DCS-17-17

and attract inexperienced cyclists. • Multi-use trails should not be provided in the same corridor as bike lanes. • Two respondents suggested that multi-use trails are a better option than on-road bike lanes. • One resident suggested that sidewalks are not needed on both sides of Weber Street, which would allow sufficient space for 4 traffic lanes over the bridge without the need for widening the structure. • One resident expressed concern for the loss of the sidewalk on west side of Weber Street, south of Albert Street, under Design Alternative 2.

Project Team Response

The Region’s Active Transportation Master Plan (ATMP) includes this section of Weber Street in its Recommended Cycling Network. The ATMP recommends the construction of on-road cycling lanes to connect with the existing on road cycling lanes on Weber Street north of Northfield Drive and the previously approved on-road cycling lanes to be constructed in 2018 on Weber Street south of Blythwood Road to Forwell Creek Road.

The Project Team believes that the Recommended Design Alternative (Modified Design Alternative No. 2) provides the best overall balance for accommodating all transportation need within the corridor. By constructing a multi-use trail on the east side of Weber Street from 75 south of Schaeffer Street to Parkside Drive, a continuous trail connection is created accommodating both cyclists and pedestrians. The proposed southbound on-road cycling lane on the west side of Weber Street will provide a continuous cycling lane for southbound cyclists along the corridor. Due to the constraint of the existing width of the bridge over the Waterloo Spur/ION tracks, the sidewalk on the west side of Weber Street from Parkside Drive to Albert Street is eliminated under the Recommended Design Alternative. However, pedestrians are accommodated via the proposed multi-use trail on the east side of Weber Street.

Comment No. 4 – Miscellaneous Comments

Summary of Comments

• Extend contract construction limits east on Northfield Drive to Parkside Drive (limits of LRT construction), as pavement structure has deteriorated east of Weber Street. • Eliminate Bus Stop on Parkside Drive, just west of Weber Street, or provide a bus pullover. Existing bus stop blocks traffic. • For Alternative Design Concepts 3 and 4, move lane taper (to single lane) from north of Parkside Drive intersection to south side of intersection. • Consider the student population is the area when making key decisions (universities, St. David’s Secondary School, Milford Avenue Public School). • One respondent recommends Cross Ride Markings at Albert Street as opposed 2415036 Page 27 of 30 156 156 August 22, 2017 Report: TES-DCS-17-17

to traditional cross walk markings.

Project Team Response

The Project Team notes the following:

• The current limits of the road reconstruction on Northfield Drive includes the section from Parkside Drive to Weber Street; • GRT stop 1179 is located 34m from Weber Street providing sufficient room to pass any stopped GRT vehicles; • Design Alternatives No. 3 and No. 4 are not being recommended for approval at this time; • The Project Team acknowledges the local educational institutions and has considered their impacts on the planning of this project; • The Project Team will explore the use of Cross Ride Markings at Albert Street and at Parkside Drive during the detailed design of this project.

2415036 Page 28 of 30 157 157 August 22, 2017 Report: TES-DCS-17-17

APPENDIX “F”

Drawing of Modified Design Alternative No. 2

2415036 Page 29 of 30 158 158 August 22, 2017 Report: TES-DCS-17-17

APPENDIX “G”

Written Comments Received from the March 28, 2017 notification letter regarding Modified Design Alternative No. 2 and Project Team Response to Comments

Comment Project Team Response - Are the bike lanes on Parkside Dr. being - The existing on-road cycling lanes on removed at the approach to the Parkside Dr. will not be removed as intersection? part of this project

- Is the intent of the trail to allow for - The boulevard multi-use trail is bidirectional travel or one-way travel? intended to allow for bidirectional travel

- First, and most important to me, is my - A boulevard multi-use trail has not concern over the lack of a multi-use trail been recommended on the east side throughout the north section of Weber of Weber Street from Parkside Drive to St (from Parkside to Northfield). Northfield Drive due to insufficient cross-sectional width near Parkside Drive and the presence of multiple driveway entrances

- The switch between bicycle lanes and - The Project Team will review industry the multi-use trail may be confusing to best practices and Transportation cyclists. I don't have any issue with the Association of Canada standards to bicycle lane being replaced with a trail, design safe transitions between on- but I would encourage the city to make road and off-road cycling faciities sure it is adequately signed as such, as these transitions can be awkward and confusing if poorly designed. - Is there any reason crossrides are not - The Project Team will explore the use planned for intersections with the multi- of Cross Ride Markings at Albert use trail? Street and at Parkside Drive during the detailed design phase of this project

2415036 Page 30 of 30 159 159

Report: TES-TRS-17-15

Region of Waterloo

Transportation and Environmental Services

Transit Services

To: Chair Tom Galloway and Members of the Planning and Works Committee

Date: August 22, 2017 File Code: D09-90

Subject: Proposed GRT Business Plan 2017- 2021

Recommendation:

That the Regional Municipality of Waterloo approve the GRT Business Plan 2017-2021, as described in report TES-TRS-17-15, dated August 22, 2017, with the implementation of the business plan subject to Regional Council’s annual budget deliberations;

And that the Regional Municipality of Waterloo direct staff to prepare the preliminary 2018 – 2027 GRT Capital Budget to include the facility, equipment and vehicle capital requirements as set out in the GRT Business Plan.

Summary:

Over the past 18 months the GRT Business Plan Steering Committee has been working with WSP Consultants to develop the proposed GRT Business Plan 2017-2021 which will guide the planned improvements to the regional transit network and service levels over the next five years to achieve the Regional Transportation Master Plan ridership target of 28 million annual riders by 2021.

The Steering Committee consisted of Councillor’s Elizabeth Clarke, Karl Kiefer, Sean Strickland, and regional staff Blair Allen, John Cicuttin, Cathy Deschamps, Reid Fulton, Eric Gillespie, Geoffrey Keyworth, Paula Sawicki.

The transit service improvements recommended in the Business Plan would complete the iXpress network, realign routes to more of a grid network connecting to ION stations and provide more frequent service on high ridership corridors. To deliver these planned service improvements, an additional 250,000 annual service hours and 48 buses would

2431830 Page 1 of 83 160 160 August 22, 2017 Report: TES-TRS-17-15

be required by 2021.

However, the GRT Business Plan Steering Committee supports the implementation of the transit service expansion over 7 years instead of 5 years as a more affordable strategy. This approach will delay achieving the targeted RTMP ridership goal of 28 million riders by two years to 2023. This strategy is discussed in more detail in the Financial Plan - Section 7 of this report.

The proposed transit network and annual service improvement plans will be refined annually based on public feedback and changing land use and travel patterns, and the implementation of the annual service improvements would then be subject to annual budget deliberations and Regional Council approvals.

The GRT Business Plan 2017-2021 also prescribes action in other supporting areas as summarized below:

Transit Priority Measures

Implement a more formal multi-divisional process that evaluates and implements transit priority measures such as signal priority and queue-jump lanes to minimize traffic delays experienced by transit vehicles. Improved and more reliable travel times encourage greater ridership.

Transportation Demand Management (TDM)

Develop a five-year TDM plan that supports the ridership growth strategy of the GRT Business Plan 2017-2021. The five-year TDM plan is scheduled to be submitted to the August 22, 2017 meeting of Planning and Works Committee.

Service Performance Management

Continue development of a comprehensive performance management system through automation of analytic methods that transform large volumes of data into meaningful information. Automated tools facilitate the necessary analysis of performance and trends in relation to key performance indicators and targets for each business unit and system wide.

GRT/LRT Integration

Continue efforts to ensure service integration between bus and rail, and initiatives that enhance active transportation access and transit-supportive land uses at LRT stations. The implementation of the EasyGO smart card system will make it convenient to pay one fare to access all GRT modes. It also speeds up boarding times on an LRT vehicle by allowing passengers to pay their fare on the LRT platform before boarding any of the four doors on each side of an LRT vehicle. Other on-going integration initiatives include

2431830 Page 2 of 83 161 161 August 22, 2017 Report: TES-TRS-17-15

promoting the launch of LRT and the integrated GRT network, passenger wayfinding, and a range of coordinated operational and security procedures.

Customer Service

Implement customer service initiatives that enhance GRT’s citizen-centred service delivery culture. Increase customer engagement by publicly sharing performance results of service attributes important to customers such as schedule adherence and on-board passenger crowding. Also, publicly share annual service improvement plans and status of completion. Encourage customer and public feedback on how to improve customer service through a formal survey program and through direct interaction with GRT management at various passenger facilities.

Marketing

Implement a more extensive marketing program to leverage the significant regional transit investments such as LRT and EasyGO fare card system. Create greater awareness of the improved competitiveness of GRT to encourage more frequent use and loyalty among existing riders and more importantly to entice new riders to GRT.

Technology

Continue to advance technology to support Traveller Information Systems and Transit Management Systems through the implementation of: i ) additional quality assurance and preventative maintenance programs for hardware and technical equipment on buses, ii) adequate support to maintain software applications, system interfaces, integration upgrades and enhancements, iii) the research and development of new technology and , iv) adequate support to maintain, develop and analyze large volume data used internally and for public information.

Next Steps

Pending Council approval of the proposed GRT Business Plan 2017-2021, staff would undertake public consultation in late September and October of this year. The primary focus would be on the proposed transit network changes that would be implemented when the ION LRT is to begin revenue operations in late spring 2018. Proposed service changes for September 2018 would also be displayed with a note that any potential implementation would be subject to approval of the 2018 Regional Budget. Staff plan to provide an information report to the September 12, 2017 Planning and Works Committee meeting regarding the Fall 2017 public consultation process.

Report:

The GRT Business Plan 2017-2021 identifies the transit network changes and service level improvements required over the next five years to attain the 2010 Regional 2431830 Page 3 of 83 162 162 August 22, 2017 Report: TES-TRS-17-15

Transportation Master Plan transit ridership targets, to support the Regional Official Plan growth and urban intensification goals, and to achieve seamless integration of ION LRT and BRT, and conventional bus services.

The new business plan addresses seven key focus areas:

1. Service Improvement Plan & Ridership Growth Strategy 2. Service Performance Management Plan 3. GRT/LRT Integration Plan 4. Customer Satisfaction Plan 5. Marketing Plan 6. Technology Plan 7. Financial Plan

Background

Ridership Targets

The 2010 Regional Transportation Master Plan established transit ridership targets of 20 million rides in 2016, 28 million rides in 2021 and 53 million annual rides in 2031. Increasing the share of travel by transit supports the regional goals of managing growth sustainably, improving air quality and contributing to a thriving and liveable community.

To achieve 28 million rides by 2021 requires ridership to increase an average of 7.2% annually. Since GRT was established in January 2000, ridership has increased an average of 5.1% annually. The 2016 RTMP ridership target of 20 million was attained in 2012. The 5.1% annual growth would have been higher if not for recent declines of 1.7 million annual rides from 2013 to 2015 due to several factors: i) loss of school board funded high school trips, ii) service impacts due to construction detours, iii) significant annual fare increases starting in 2012 and iv) localized service reductions in 2013 and 2014. Other non-local factors include lower fuel prices and perhaps some transit trips shifting to Uber or similar services.

Recent transit ridership declines have also been experienced by other southern Ontario transit systems. However, there are several market fundamentals in the Region that point to future ridership growth. Population continues to grow and a young and diverse work force has a greater propensity to use transit. Mixed-use development and intensification along the central transit corridor will support and benefit from higher-order transit service - ION LRT. Also, fewer construction detour impacts will again make conventional bus routes more convenient and reliable in the near future.

Ridership Projections

New ridership projections were developed based on the positive impact the LRT will have on the development of a competitive and integrated regional transit network. The 2431830 Page 4 of 83 163 163 August 22, 2017 Report: TES-TRS-17-15

combined ION LRT and BRT ridership projected in the new ground up forecast is comparable to the results of the travel forecast model based projections used to support the Rapid Transit Business Case. System-wide upper range and mid range ridership forecast scenarios were developed in the new analysis. In both cases, bus service expansion was also included at 50,000 service hours annually or an additional 250,000 service hours at the end of the five-year plan. The 2017 Regional Budget approved an additional 50,000 annual service hours in 2017 of which 18,000 service hours representing the 205 Ottawa iXpress were deferred for implementation to April 2018.

As illustrated in Table 1 below, the upper range 2021 system ridership forecast of 29.7 million exceeds the 28 million 2021 RTMP ridership target. The mid range 2021 ridership forecast of 28.3 million achieves the 28 million 2021 RTMP ridership target. Without annual bus service expansion both upper range (25.4 million) and mid range (24.1 million) ridership forecasts fall considerably short of the 28 million 2021 RTMP ridership target.

Staff are supporting the mid range system ridership forecast (including annual bus service expansion). The rate of ridership growth of the mid range scenario is reflective of the experience of other cities with the successful implementation of their first LRT line.

Table 1: GRT System Ridership Forecast

GRT System Ridership Forecast (millions) Scenario 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 Upper Range 20.0 22.3 25.4 27.9 29.7 Mid Range 20.0 21.8 24.3 26.6 28.3 No bus expansion (upper 21.8 23.8 25.0 25.4 range) No bus expansion 21.3 22.8 23.7 24.1 (mid range) The five year ridership forecast will be recalibrated each year based on actual results of the previous year.

As discussed below, ridership growth will be dependent on continued service improvements. Two other policy directions that have major impact on short and long- term ridership growth are continued efforts to encourage transit-supportive land use at LRT stations and along BRT and iXpress lines, and parking strategies and pricing that support land use intensification and encourage the use of sustainable modes of travel.

Service Growth

To achieve the mid range annual ridership forecast of 28.3 million by 2021 requires continued service improvements to the bus network to support the LRT line and to 2431830 Page 5 of 83 164 164 August 22, 2017 Report: TES-TRS-17-15

develop an integrated regional transit network.

Between 2017 and 2021 it is estimated that annual bus service hours need to increase on average by 5.7% (50,000 hours) along with the implementation of ION LRT to achieve the 2021 RTMP ridership target of 28 million. This represents an increase of approximately 250,000 annual service hours; from 760,000 service hours in 2016 to just over a 1,000,000 by 2021. Also, an additional 40 peak buses would be required over the five-year period plus an additional 8 maintenance spare buses for a total conventional fleet expansion of 48 buses.

The proposed service growth of 250,000 service hours and addition of 48 conventional buses by 2021 will be subject to annual budget deliberations and the recommended service growth for any given year may be deferred or reduced. Comparing actual budget approvals to the business plan recommendation for service growth will determine the degree of deviation from achieving the 2021 RTMP 28 million ridership target.

1.0 Service Improvement Plan and Ridership Growth Strategy

The proposed changes to the transit network and service levels over the next five years and potential alternative service delivery models are discussed in detail in Appendix A – Service Improvement Plan and Ridership Growth Strategy and summarized below.

GRT is planning annual service improvements between 2017 and 2021 to increase ridership by completing the iXpress network, realigning routes to more of a grid network connecting to ION stations and providing frequent service on high ridership routes. The proposed 2021 Transit Network is illustrated in Figures 1 and 2. The proposed transit network and service implementation priorities will be refined each year based on public feedback through the consultation process, annual budget deliberations and, ridership and land use changes.

Completion of iXpress Network

The iXpress network was developed to provide frequent, limited-stop service along major travel corridors that connect with ION stations. These routes provide faster, more direct service between key destinations in the Region. Large shelters, bicycle racks, and real-time passenger information displays are provided at most stops to enhance the rider experience.

It is proposed the iXpress network would be fully implemented as illustrated in Figure 3 by 2021. New and extended iXpress routes proposed to be implemented by 2021 include:

2431830 Page 6 of 83 165 165 August 22, 2017 Report: TES-TRS-17-15

• 205 Ottawa iXpress, serving the Ottawa Street corridor between Sunrise Centre and Lackner Boulevard, connecting to Mill and Borden stations (2018), with a possible extension to Trussler Road (2021); • An extension of the 201 Fischer-Hallman iXpress to Block Line Station and Conestoga College, via Block Line Road, Manitou Drive and Homer Watson Boulevard (2018); • An extension of the 200 iXpress with branded buses (ION Bus) to the South Cambridge Shopping Centre (2019); and • 206 Coronation iXpress, serving the King-Coronation corridor between Fairview Park Mall and West Galt, connecting to Fairway Station (2019).

1.1 Proposed Annual Service Improvements (2017-2021)

The proposed annual service improvements between 2017 and 2021 that are required to complete the 2021 Transit Network are summarized in Table 2 and discussed in more detail in the section below. The staging of annual service improvements is based on ION LRT beginning revenue service in late spring 2018.

2431830 Page 7 of 83 166 166 August 22, 2017 Report: TES-TRS-17-15

Table 2: Proposed Annual Service Improvements 2017-2021 Time Improvements Existing Routes Period Affected* 2017  Frequency improvements 10, 27, 51, 52, 56,  Cambridge Centre Station 57, 61, 75, 110,  New midday service 200, 201, 202  Alternative Service Delivery Pilot iXpress • (Approved in 2017 Budget based on Preliminary Business Plan report, August 2016) Late Spring  Central Transit Corridor route 1, 2, 3, 4, 7, 8, 9, 2018 restructuring 11, 12, 13, 14, 16,  Southwest Kitchener Phase 1A 20, 22, 23, 27, 29,  North Waterloo 31, 33, 73, 78, 92,  Ottawa Street Corridor – 205 iXpress 200, 201, 202, 204, introduced 205 iXpress  UW Transit Station Fall 2018  Southwest Kitchener Phase 1B 10, 61, 110, 116, 201 iXpress

Fall 2019  Completion of iXpress network 51, 52, 53, 54, 55, . 200 ION Bus extended in 57, 58, 59, 61, 62, Cambridge 63, 111, 200 ION . 206 Coronation iXpress introduced Bus, 206 iXpress  Cambridge Phase 1 . Galt, Preston 2020 -  Southwest Kitchener Phase 2 TBD 2021  Cambridge Phase 2 . Preston, L.G. Lovell Industrial Park, Cambridge Business Park  North Waterloo Phase 2  Complete transition of routes from Charles Street Terminal to Downtown Kitchener ION stations  Frequency Improvements  Additional services to new growth areas and the Townships * Route numbers may change as route revisions are made

2017 Service Plan

The approved 2017 Regional Budget included a range of service improvements as

2431830 Page 8 of 83 167 167 August 22, 2017 Report: TES-TRS-17-15

described below and illustrated in Figures 4 and 5:

1. Frequency improvements on high-ridership routes, to address overcrowding and encourage ridership growth: Routes 10 and 110 (which travel between Fairview Park Mall and Conestoga College), and the 201 and 202 iXpress.

2. Midday service reintroduced to Routes 27 Chicopee and 57 Blair Road on weekdays. This would reverse service reductions made in 2014, improving transit accessibility to Freeport Hospital in the summer months and to West Galt year-round.

3. Alternative transit service delivery pilot program for a lower-demand area(s). A consultant has been retained to undertake the pilot study. (see Appendix A - Applications for Alternative Service Models section for detail).

During the 2017 Regional Budget process, the implementation of the 205 Ottawa iXpress was deferred from September 2017 to April 2018.

2018 (Late Spring) Service Plan

The proposed 2018 Transit Network would be implemented with the launch of ION LRT, and involves the restructuring of routes to more directly connect with ION stations and minimize duplication of service (Figure 6). Most routes in the Central Transit Corridor and Southwest Kitchener would be modified at this time. Some routes that serve the University of Waterloo would be realigned to access the Transit Plaza bus-only roadway adjacent to the UW LRT station.

Central Transit Corridor (CTC) Route Changes:

200 iXpress – revised to operate from Fairway Station to Ainslie Street Terminal only, and re-branded as “ION Bus” with new vehicles. Service between Conestoga Mall and Fairway would be replaced by ION LRT.

Route 7 Mainline – streamlined from Fairway Station to Conestoga Station via King Street and Connaught Street. Branches to the University of Waterloo (7D, 7E) would be replaced by ION LRT. Passengers travelling on Route 7 and destined to University of Waterloo would transfer to east-west routes on University Avenue or Columbia Street. A high frequency of service is also required along the King Street corridor to accommodate increasing demand from redevelopment and intensification and from areas beyond the walk distance to an LRT station.

Route 9 Lakeshore – split into two routes, to provide more direct service. One route would serve the David Johnston Research & Technology Park and McCormick area; the

2431830 Page 9 of 83 168 168 August 22, 2017 Report: TES-TRS-17-15

other route would serve the Hazel Street corridor. The McCormick and Hazel areas are high ridership neighbourhoods that will no longer be served by the 200 iXpress and are beyond the catchment area of an LRT station. As a result, a high frequency of service on both local routes would be provided. This route would also provide service to the West Ring Road.

New direct route on Weber Street from University Avenue to Fairway Road, connecting with Fairway Station and additional ION stations in Downtown Kitchener. This would replace portions of routes 4, 7 and 8, streamlining service in this major corridor parallel to ION.

Some downtown Kitchener routes (eg., Route 1 and 204 iXpress) would bypass Charles Street Terminal and facilitate transfers at the Central, Queen, or Frederick LRT stations. Charles Street Terminal will continue to be used by intercity bus operators, including GO, Greyhound and Coach Canada and some GRT routes until the multi- modal hub at King and Victoria Streets is operational.

Southwest Kitchener Route Changes:

In Southwest Kitchener, routes would be realigned to connect to predominantly Mill, Block Line or Fairway LRT stations. With a focus on connections at these locations, the Forest Glen Terminal will become redundant. Highlights include:

• Expanded local service to the Huron Village/Rosenberg communities. • More direct service between the Huron Business Park and ION LRT. • Extension of the 201 iXpress along Block Line Road to the Block Line station. • Implementation of the 205 Ottawa iXpress, which would provide a missing link connecting southeast and southwest Kitchener, integrating with ION LRT at the Borden and Mill stations.

UW Transit Plaza:

Revising routes 9, 13, 31, 200 and 201 iXpress to serve the new multi-modal transit station at the University of Waterloo. These routes would then be integrated with the University of Waterloo ION station. Discussions are underway with the University of Waterloo on the potential for the 202 iXpress to serve the new UW transit plaza.

Combined, the restructuring of CTC routes, Northwest Waterloo, and Southwest Kitchener routes would be completed in late spring 2018 without the addition of service hours or peak buses, through the reallocation of existing service. The reallocation of existing service would also fund the implementation of 10 minute peak frequency on the 201 and 202 iXpress lines. The streamlining of Route 7 and cancellation of the 200 iXpress between Conestoga and Fairway would make 22 peak buses and approximately 60,000 service hours available, which would be redeployed to provide the 2431830 Page 10 of 83 169 169 August 22, 2017 Report: TES-TRS-17-15

resources necessary to support the service changes described above.

2018 (September) Service Plan

The proposed service changes for September 2018 relate to improved service to Conestoga College and to better integrate with ION LRT level of service (Figure 6). Highlights include:

• Routes 10 Conestoga College – more direct service between Fairway Station and Conestoga College • 201 iXpress – extend from Block Line Station to Conestoga College, replacing the current Route 116 College express with frequent, all-day service. • Extend hours of operation and frequency of service on selected routes to coordinate with ION LRT level of service. • Contingency hours to respond to service gaps, operational issues and increased ridership demands due to impact of ION LRT.

2019 (September) Service Plan

The proposed service changes for 2019 involve completion of the iXpress network in Cambridge and restructuring of local routes to integrate with the iXpress network. Highlights include:

• 200 ION Bus - extend to the South Cambridge Shopping Centre along Main Street to connect east Galt to Hespeler Road and provide a one-seat ride to the Fairway LRT station. • 206 iXpress - The Coronation iXpress would provide a frequent, direct link between West Galt, Cambridge Memorial Hospital, Preston, Sportsworld and Fairway LRT Station, providing a one-seat ride to ION LRT. • Many of the local routes in Cambridge would also be restructured at this time to connect with ION Bus stations, provide more of a grid network, reduce duplication with the Coronation iXpress, and improve hours of operation (Cambridge Phase 1).

2020 - 2021 Service Plans

Any service changes proposed for 2017-2019 that were not fully implemented would be programmed for this time period. In addition, the following improvements are contemplated on a conceptual level and are subject to further refinement:

• Route 31 Columbia extension to serve the development of the Clair Hills community (Northwest Waterloo Phase 2). • Complete permanent transition of routes from Charles Street Terminal to Downtown Kitchener ION stations, including the new King Victoria Transit Hub. • Additional frequency improvements on priority routes across the network. • Additional services to new growth areas and the Townships – see the Alternative Service Models section in Appendix A for more detail.

1.2 Transit Priority Measures

There are a wide range of transit priority measures (TPM) that can assist transit operations including “yield to bus” legislation, bus-only movements, queue-jump lanes, shoulder bypass lanes and exclusive bus-lanes. TPM’s reduce traffic delays experienced by transit vehicles thereby improving transit travel times and schedule reliability. As a result, transit service is more attractive to users encouraging greater ridership. The larger capacity of transit buses and trains means transit priority measures move more people efficiently thereby improving the overall transportation system throughput.

Currently in the Region, the application of TPM’s is limited to a few locations including queue-jump lanes and signal priority along Hespeler Road, signal priority along University Avenue, and by-pass shoulders along Highway 8. The size of the GRT network suggests there is considerable opportunity to increase the application of TPM’s to improve transit travel times and service reliability.

It is proposed that a formal inter-divisional working group be established to review the locations where transit vehicles experience the greatest traffic delay as determined by the on-board vehicle location system. Next steps would be to evaluate the range of feasible transit priority measures, undertake a preliminary design, budget and program the transit priority measure in the Transportation Capital Program.

1.3 Transportation Demand Management

The Region’s Transportation Demand Program (TDM) is positioned to support GRT’s ridership growth strategy through many of the current TDM initiatives. For example, the Travelwise Transportation Management Association can be leveraged to promote directly to all member employees the benefits of ION, GRT and active transportation options, and to promote and distribute the EasyGO fare card. Other opportunities include working with area municipalities through the development approval process to ensure subdivision and site design of developments are transit-supportive and pedestrian and bike friendly.

TDM staff can further collaborate with other Regional departments and area municipalities in their ION LRT station area planning processes (including transit, active 2431830 Page 12 of 83 171 171 August 22, 2017 Report: TES-TRS-17-15

transportation, and parking) currently underway. In anticipation of the launch of ION and the transit network redesign, there is an opportunity to support the inclusion of TDM principles into these plans to encourage modal shift.

A TDM Plan 2017-2021 has been developed that includes many projects and initiatives that support the ridership growth strategy of the GRT Business Plan 2017-2021. The TDM Plan 2017-2021 is being submitted to the August 22, 2017 Planning and Works Committee for approval.

2.0 Service Performance Management Plan

On an average weekday, GRT deploys almost 200 buses a day to deliver over 3,600 bus trips that carry 65,000 riders. The current performance management system provides a solid foundation to develop a more robust and comprehensive service performance management system. The goal is for each business unit to have available the necessary data and analysis tools to more effectively manage the system. One of the challenges is to transform the large volumes of data generated daily by the automatic vehicle location system, automatic passenger counters and, in the near future, the EasyGO smart card system into meaningful information. It is important that automated tools continue to be developed that facilitate the necessary analysis of performance and trends in relation to key performance indicators and targets for each business unit and system wide. It is also proposed to develop organizational capacity within GRT that would be dedicated to the continued development of the comprehensive performance management system.

3.0 GRT/LRT Integration Plan

The successful launch of ION LRT depends on a seamless customer experience during the transition from the existing all-bus system to the future bus-and-rail system. The impact and integration of ION LRT into the regional transit network has been an overarching focus in this Business Plan. Staff continues to work on the many integration issues as detailed in Appendix B and as summarized below:

3.1 Service Integration

An integrated transit network anchored on ION LRT requires passengers to conveniently transfer between rail and bus. As part of the LRT project, bus stops were located and constructed in close proximity to LRT stations to minimize transfer walk distances. Bus shelters have a similar design to the LRT station shelter to indicate to customers that the two modes are integrated at the particular intersection. Real-time information displays at the bus stop and LRT station will reassure waiting passengers on the next arrival time.

At strategic locations like the University of Waterloo and Fairview Park Mall where many bus routes converge, new passenger facilities are being constructed to ensure 2431830 Page 13 of 83 172 172 August 22, 2017 Report: TES-TRS-17-15

integration with LRT stations. Passengers will have a short and convenient walk when transferring to LRT or bus, or when accessing nearby destinations. Unique shelter designs, benches and real-time information displays will provide comfort and convenience to waiting passengers.

3.2. Fare Integration

The implementation of the EasyGO fare card system will support a “One System - One Fare” payment system, where customers pay one fare to ride and transfer between all GRT services: conventional bus, ION LRT and ION Bus, MobilityPLUS and BusPLUS. The EasyGO fare card also enables implementation of a “proof of payment” system for the LRT. Passengers will pay their fare on the LRT platform by tapping their EasyGO fare card on the platform fare validator before boarding through one of many doors on the LRT vehicle. A fare enforcement and awareness program is being developed to support the proof of payment program on the LRT service. Multi-door boarding will minimize dwell times and is a significant operational efficiency that will prove more valuable as ridership levels on LRT increase in the future.

3.3 Station Integration

A primary objective of Waterloo Region and area municipal traffic, active transportation, roadway construction and land use planning functions in the coming years will be to gradually improve transit and pedestrian connectivity to the ION stations and to promote the development and growth of station areas. To support these efforts, GRT has created “Station Profiles” to document existing and planned bus connections, active transportation opportunities and surrounding development and land use patterns at each of the 19 ION LRT stations. The profiles include an inventory of existing conditions and of planned future improvements, as well as recommended improvements to pedestrian and land use features in the station areas. Appendix C illustrates the University of Waterloo station profile.

Staff plans to use the station profiles collaboratively with the area municipalities’ station area planning efforts to identify active transportation network improvements that support access to ION stations and GRT bus stops. The station profiles will also be used to communicate proposed service changes to the public and key stakeholders.

Other integration initiatives include promoting the launch of LRT and the integrated GRT network, passenger wayfinding, and a range of coordinated operational and security procedures.

3.4 Charles Street Transit Terminal Transition

With the implementation of ION LRT, there will be a reduction in bus routes that pass through the Charles Street Terminal or terminate in downtown Kitchener. Passenger transfers that now occur at the Charles Street Terminal will be distributed among the 2431830 Page 14 of 83 173 173 August 22, 2017 Report: TES-TRS-17-15

downtown Kitchener LRT stations as shown in Figure 7. Scheduled bus layovers to facilitate passenger transfers and operator personal breaks would be relocated from the Charles Street Terminal to the end of route facilities. New facilities for operator lunchbreaks are being constructed at Conestoga Mall and Fairway stations. Other locations are being considered for operator facilities such as the Block Line station, Conestoga College, Stanley Park Mall and the Sunrise Centre.

Some of the existing services and amenities located at the Charles Street Terminal are planned to be located at the Central Station multi-modal hub. GO buses and intercity carriers will have interior on-site bus bays that are weather protected. Walk distance for transferring passengers between the on-site bus bays and on-street GRT/LRT stops will be minimal, and the new GO Train station at the multi-modal hub will also be in close proximity. Other services and amenities at the hub would include customer pick up/drop-off, taxi, ride-sharing, community car share, bike parking, fare product purchases, customer information, public washrooms and security staff.

Once the Central Station multi-modal hub is functioning, the Charles Street Terminal can be completely phased out.

4.0 Customer Service Plan

Continuous improvement to customer service is fundamental to the success of any service industry, public transit included. Today GRT comes into contact with over 65,000 passengers on an average weekday. The level of customer satisfaction depends on how well GRT delivers reliable and convenient services, including the methods by which it communicates and evaluates those services.

Even though almost 80% of riders are either very satisfied or satisfied with GRT services, customers continue to express concern with some areas of the service. Many of the core customer service issues include: improving frequency of service to address overcrowding, increasing the hours and days of operation on select routes, restructuring routes to improve connectivity, schedule reliability and ease of comprehension, and the extension of service to growth areas would be addressed by the proposed service improvements in the GRT Business Plan 2017-2021. Other issues like snow clearing of bus stops will continue to be monitored and, if need be, additional resources would be requested through the budget process.

GRT has an extensive array of existing customer service programs and initiatives that are focussed on improving the customer experience when using GRT. For example, customers can access real bus time information and all front-line employees receive ongoing customer service training. Also, bus stops are upgraded annually with concrete pads to improve accessibility and with shelters and benches to improve comfort. Existing customer service initiatives provide a solid foundation that enhances the citizen-centred culture embedded in GRT’s values and practices and in the service 2431830 Page 15 of 83 174 174 August 22, 2017 Report: TES-TRS-17-15

employees deliver every day.

During the next five years, GRT plans to increase engagement of customers by publishing performance results on a range of service attributes like schedule adherence and bus overcrowding on the website. Also published would be the projects and programs GRT plans to complete in a given year along with status of completion. A more robust customer survey program is planned to assist in identifying initiatives that would maintain the loyalty of existing riders and encourage them to ride more frequently, and to measure customer satisfaction trends. GRT management will be meeting directly with customers in the field to solicit customer feedback first-hand.

The Charles Street terminal provides important customer service functions such as fare product sales and travel information. As fewer routes will be using the Charles Street terminal, it is important to establish a secondary customer service location. Ultimately the Central Station multi-modal hub will provide similar customer service functions as the Charles Street terminal does. During the transition period before the multi-modal hub is operational, GRT will be looking to establish a “storefront” customer service function near the Frederick LRT station. Once the multi-modal hub is operational the need for the Frederick “storefront” operation will be evaluated. The advantage of maintaining both locations for customer service is some routes traveling through downtown Kitchener only connect with the Central Station and other downtown routes only connect with the Frederick Station.

5.0 Marketing Plan

Over the next five years GRT will experience a quantum leap as a competitive travel option for many residents of Waterloo Region as a result of significant improvements to the service including: the start of LRT service, completion of the iXpress network and continued improvement to service levels with a focus on more frequent service, the introduction of new and enhanced passenger facilities and the implementation of the EasyGO fare card system.

To leverage the significant regional transit investments, a more extensive marketing program is proposed to keep current customers aware of the many changes and opportunities that can improve their travel experience. More importantly, an expanded marketing program is required to create awareness and entice non-riders to use transit.

GRT’s proposed new five-year marketing program as detailed in Appendix D includes proposed strategies and activities that would:

• Create greater awareness and public support of the GRT master brand and its service brands, particularly ION and iXpress • Shape stakeholder perceptions of GRT as an organization • Establish a rider-centric focus based on the GRT target personas

2431830 Page 16 of 83 175 175 August 22, 2017 Report: TES-TRS-17-15

Ensure rider loyalty and position GRT as a competitive travel option to attract new customers

6.0 Technology Plan

The Region has made a sizable investment in Intelligent Transportation Systems (ITS) infrastructure over the past ten years using tailored commercial off the shelf products, which is a common approach for public transit ITS deployments. Up to $20m in ITS capital infrastructure, software and on-going maintenance costs has been invested over the past decade. Leveraging this investment, integrating other transit initiatives and embracing trends such as open source data, will ensure the continuation of a vibrant, efficient and effective transit system.

For the external users (riders, general public, etc.), the focus of ITS is to provide static and real-time traveller information to support trip planning and on-route information. Notifying users of service disruptions, next bus departures and other relevant information, such as service and system changes, allows users to more effectively plan their trips. For internal audiences (Bus Operators, Street Supervisors, Customer Service Representatives, Fleet Supervisors, Transit Development staff, etc.), the focus is to provide GRT employees with the tools and programs to deliver value to riders, improve service effectiveness and efficiency, and maintain the state of good repair of assets.

GRT’s existing ITS infrastructure includes an extensive array of hardware and software. Major ITS system components currently in use or actively under development are detailed in Appendix E.

To leverage more value from GRT’s robust technology investment, organizational capacity is required to support four important functional activities:

1) Implementation of quality assurance and preventative maintenance programs for hardware and technical equipment on buses and in the field. Adequate staff support in this functional area ensures work is acceptably completed, and that equipment performs to product specifications. 2) Implementation and maintenance of software applications, system interfaces and integration, upgrades and enhancements. Adequate staff support in this functional area ensures important systems that are interconnected and relied on daily by customers and GRT employees operate effectively and accurately. 3) The research and development of new and emerging technology to address customer requirements and to support the evolution of effective transit service delivery. 4) Implementation, maintenance, development, analysis of many, large volume data sets used internally and for public information. Adequate staff support in this functional area ensures all the traveller information systems provide accurate real-time information to riders and that the automated vehicle location system 2431830 Page 17 of 83 176 176 August 22, 2017 Report: TES-TRS-17-15

accurately tracks bus locations in real-time. Ongoing development of robust data analytic systems would support the service performance management system

Additional staff resources would be requested though the annual budget process. GRT is currently reviewing options for an organizational structure for an ITS group within the Transit Services Division that would best support existing and implementation of new or enhanced ITS applications as identified in this Transit Technology Plan

7.0 Financial Plan

The financial operating requirements of the proposed GRT Business Plan 2017-2021 are detailed in Appendix F. In order to attain the 2021 RTMP target of 28 million rides, the service improvement strategy forecasts that the amount of service GRT provides would increase by 250,000 annual service hours over the next five years.

As a result of the proposed service growth and new operating costs from LRT, operating costs would increase annually. Some of the operating costs increases would be offset by increases in passenger revenue resulting from ridership growth combined with proposed annual fare increases of 2.0%. While the cost-recovery ratio declines during the first several years of the plan, it stabilizes during the last two years. Going forward, the additional capacity provided by LRT, completion of the iXpress network and additional higher frequency routes can accommodate future ridership growth with lower marginal additional costs. It is expected that the financial performance of GRT will continue to improve post 2021 as higher ridership levels using existing service capacity are attained.

Seven Year Plan Implementation Scenario

When reviewing the financial implications of implementing the proposed 5 year business plan, the Steering Committee supported implementing the service improvements over a seven (7) year period. Rather than expanding the transit system by 50,000 annual service hours, or 5.7% on average annually, it would be expanded by an average of 35,000 annual services hours 4.2% on average annually. Staff will submit a Budget Issue Paper annually for the proposed service expansion.

One of the implications of stretching out the implementation of the five year business plan to seven years is that some service improvements would be deferred. As a result, ridership achieved in 2021 would be 27.3 million, short of the 28.0 million ridership target (see Table 3). It is projected that 28.0 million rides would be achieved in 2023.

Some of the service improvements that could be delayed in implementation include completion of the iXpress network in Cambridge, extension of hours and days of

2431830 Page 18 of 83 177 177 August 22, 2017 Report: TES-TRS-17-15

operation on selected routes to coordinate with ION LRT and frequency improvements on higher performing routes.

Staff will continually monitor route performance, travel pattern and land use changes, to establish new service improvement priorities to be included in the annual service expansion plan of 35,000. Each year staff would compare actual budget approvals to the business plan recommendation for service growth to determine the degree of deviation from achieving the 2021 RTMP 28 million ridership target.

Table 3: Projected Ridership and Financial Performance of 7 Year Plan

2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 Actuals Service TOTAL 762,000 778,000 854,000 911,000 944,000 980,000 Hours LRT 0 0 37,000 55,000 55,000 57,000 BUS 762,000 778,000 817,000 856,000 889,000 923,000 Ridership 19.7 20.0 21.8 24.1 26.0 27.3 (millions) Operating Cost $82.2 $88.9 $106.3 $119.3 $127.9 $135.7 (millions) Passenger Revenue $31.4 $32.4 $35.7 $40.1 $44.4 $48.0 (millions) System Revenue $32.2 $33.2 $36.5 $40.9 $45.2 $48.8 Net Operating $50.0 $55.7 $69.8 $78.4 $82.7 $86.9 Cost Net Operating $2.58 $2.82 $3.25 $3.29 $3.21 $3.21 Cost per Rider Revenue/ Cost 39.2% 37.3% 34.3% 34.3% 35.3% 36.0% Ratio

Note: Operating costs in this table exclude debt servicing, reserve contributions and the financing and life cycle components of the projected monthly service payments to GrandLinq.

2431830 Page 19 of 83 178 178 August 22, 2017 Report: TES-TRS-17-15

Table 4: Capital Requirements ($’s million)

2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 Total

Peak Buses + (Spares) 15+(3) 0 5+(1) 10+(2) 10+(2) 40 +(8)

Expanded Bus Fleet Costs $9.00 $3.15 $6.3 $6.3 $24.75

Passenger/Driver

Facilities:

1) Conestoga College $1.0 $3.0 $4.0

2) Sunrise Centre $0.9 $0.9 Station Development

206 Coronation iXpress $1.35 $1.35

200 iXpress extension

Customer Service $0.25 $0.25 $0.50

Storefront

Conestoga Mall Transit $0.05 $0.45 $0.50 Facility Upgrade

Transit Technology $0.925 $0.4 $0.35 $0.905 $2.58

Transit Facility Design $0.05 $0.05 $0.10 Guidelines

Transit Wayfinding Plan $0.05 $0.05

Total $9.00 $3.225 $8.4 $6.9 $7.205 $34.73

Staff recommend including all capital requirements set out in the GRT Business Plan in the draft 2018 – 2027 GRT Capital Program. Approval of such investments will be subject to annual budget approval. Through the 2018 Regional Budget process the cost profile for expansion buses will also be updated to reflect higher vehicle purchase costs. The 18 expansion buses for 2017 have been approved for 50% federal funding under the Public Transit Infrastructure Fund (PTIF) program.

All approved updates to the GRT capital plan will be factored into the development of the next Regional Development Charge Background Study anticipated in 2019. It is expected that a significant portion of the planned investment in GRT growth related capital will still be required to be funded from future property taxes. Staff will continue to 2431830 Page 20 of 83 179 179 August 22, 2017 Report: TES-TRS-17-15

monitor federal and provincial funding announcements for alternate capital funding sources. Future announcements are expected with respect to Phase II of the Public Transit Infrastructure Fund (PTIF) and the possibility of increased Provincial Gas Tax funding which can be incorporated into the GRT capital funding strategy, if appropriate.

8.0 Next Steps

The proposed 2021 Transit Network and annual service improvement plans will be subject to further public consultation and the annual budget process and Council approval.

To date, public feedback has been received at several events:

• University of Waterloo Transit Plaza Public Information Centre • ION Community Open House • ION Phase 2 Consultation Centres • City of Kitchener Planning Around Rapid Transit Stations (PARTS) Public Information Centre In general, comments have been supportive of the proposed changes to the transit network. The next round of public consultation would occur in late September and October of this year, with the primary focus being on the proposed transit network changes that would be implemented when the ION LRT is to begin revenue operations in late spring 2018. Proposed service changes for September 2018 would also be displayed for feedback with a note that any potential implementation would be subject to approval of the 2018 Regional Budget. Staff plan to provide an information report to the September 12, 2017 Planning and Works Committee meeting regarding the Fall 2017 public consultation process.

Corporate Strategic Plan:

Supports the implementation of Council’s Strategic Focus area objective 2.1: Create a public transportation network that is integrated, accessible, affordable and sustainable.

Financial Implications:

The financial implications of delivering the proposed increase of 250,000 annual service hours over seven years (190,000 service hours in five years) are detailed in Table 5. The incremental tax levy to fund the seven year implementation plan to 2021 is estimated at $6.8 million. In comparison, the tax levy impact of providing an additional 250,000 service hours in five years is estimated at $10.17 million by 2021, an increase of $3.37 million compared to the seven year plan.

2431830 Page 21 of 83 180 180 August 22, 2017 Report: TES-TRS-17-15

Table 5: Financial Implications of 7 Year Plan ($’s 000)

2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 Total Additional 35,000 Service Hours 32,000 35,000 35,000 35,000 190,000 18,000 (1)

New Service Variable $1,360 $2,030 $990 $1,020 $1,040 $6,440 Operating Costs

Annualized Variable $1,390 $2,540 $2,050 $2,090 $8,070 Operating Costs

New Ridership ($150 ) ( $710 ) ( $1,360 ) ( $1,690 ) ( $1,620 ) ($5,530) Revenue

Incremental Net $1,210 $2,710 $2,170 $1,380 $1,510 $8,980 Operating Costs Incremental - $330 - $240 $480 $1,050 Debt Service Incremental Bus Replacement - $720 - $240 $480 $1,440 Contributions Fare Change ($550) ($900) ($970) ($1,080) ($1,180) ($4,680) Revenue (2) Incremental $660 $2,860 $1,200 $780 $1,290 $6,790 Levy Impact

(1) 2017 budget approved 32,000 of 50,000 in additional service hours (bundles 1 & 2 from issue paper). An additional 18,000 service hours (bundle 3) for Ottawa iXpress were approved to be added to the 2018 GRT base budget with service commencing in the spring 2018.

(2) Includes 2% annual average fare increase July 1 and 4.99% annual U-Pass increase

2431830 Page 22 of 83 181 181 August 22, 2017 Report: TES-TRS-17-15

Other Department Consultations/Concurrence:

The GRT Business Plan 2017-2021 Steering Committee includes staff from the Rapid Transit, Transportation and Finance Divisions, and included Councillors Elizabeth Clarke, Karl Kiefer and Sean Strickland.

Attachments

Figure 1. Proposed 2021 Transit Network – Kitchener-Waterloo Figure 2. Proposed 2021 Transit Network – Cambridge Figure 3. iXpress Network Figure 4. Proposed September 2017 Service Improvements – Kitchener-Waterloo Figure 5. Proposed September 2017 Service Improvements – Cambridge Figure 6. Proposed Transit Network Changes in 2018 Figure 7. Bus-ION service in Downtown Kitchener Appendix A: Service Improvement Plan and Ridership Growth Strategy Appendix B: GANTT Chart - ION Integration Task List Appendix C: Example University of Waterloo ION Station Profile Appendix D: Marketing Program Strategies and Activities Appendix E: Intelligent Transportation System – Major Components Summary Appendix F: Projected Ridership and Financial Performance of 5 Year Plan

Prepared By:

John Cicuttin, Manager Transit Development

Eric Gillespie, Director Transit Services

Approved By: Thomas Schmidt, Commissioner Transportation and Environmental Services

2431830 Page 23 of 83 182 182 August 22, 2017 Report: TES-TRS-17-15

Figure 1 Proposed 2021 Transit Network – Kitchener-Waterloo

2431830 Page 24 of 83 183 183 August 22, 2017 Report: TES-TRS-17-15

Figure 2. Proposed 2021 Transit Network – Cambridge

2431830 Page 25 of 83 184 184 August 22, 2017 Report: TES-TRS-17-15

Figure 3. iXpress Network

2431830 Page 26 of 83 185 185 August 22, 2017 Report: TES-TRS-17-15

Figure 4. Proposed September 2017 Service Improvements – Kitchener-Waterloo

2431830 Page 27 of 83 186 186 August 22, 2017 Report: TES-TRS-17-15

Figure 5. Proposed September 2017 Service Improvements – Cambridge

2431830 Page 28 of 83 187 187 August 22, 2017 Report: TES-TRS-17-15

Figure 6. Proposed Transit Network Changes in 2018

2431830 Page 29 of 83 188 188 August 22, 2017 Report: TES-TRS-17-15

Figure 7. Bus-ION service in Downtown Kitchener

2431830 189 189 August 22, 2017 Report: TES-TRS-17-15

Appendix A

Service Improvement Plan and Ridership Growth Strategy

1.0. 2021 Transit Network

GRT is planning annual service improvements between 2017 and 2021 to increase ridership based on three key principles:

1) Completing the iXpress network of limited-stop bus routes;

2) Realigning routes to more of a grid network, focused on ION stations; and

3) Providing frequent service on high ridership routes.

These principles reflect three of the six key initiatives in GRT’s New Directions Ridership Growth Strategy, shown in the image below. They also support the initiatives to provide seamless connections to ION and to provide more comfortable stops and stations.

Expansion is also being planned to serve new growth areas and the rural townships. The draft 2021 Transit Network is shown in Figures 1 and 2.

2431830 190 190 August 22, 2017 Report: TES-TRS-17-15

Figure 1: Proposed 2021 Transit Network – Kitchener-Waterloo

2431830 Page 32 of 83 191 191 August 22, 2017 Report: TES-TRS-17-15

Figure 2: Proposed 2021 Transit Network – Cambridge

2431830 Page 33 of 83 192 192 August 22, 2017 Report: TES-TRS-17-15

1.1 More iXpress Routes

The iXpress network was developed to provide frequent, limited-stop service along major travel corridors, connecting with ION stations. These routes provide faster, more direct service between key destinations in the Region. Large shelters, bicycle racks, and real-time passenger information displays are provided at as many stops as possible to enhance the rider experience.

Together with ION LRT and ION Bus, these routes would provide frequent, express transit along many of the crosstown corridors in the Region, serving over 133,000 current residents by 2018 or about 30% of the service area population, as shown in Figure 3:

Figure 3: 2018 iXpress and ION Service Coverage

2431830 Page 34 of 83 193 193 August 22, 2017 Report: TES-TRS-17-15

New and extended iXpress routes proposed to be implemented by 2021 include:

• 205 Ottawa iXpress, serving the Ottawa Street corridor between Sunrise Centre and Lackner Boulevard, connecting to Mill and Borden stations (2018), with a possible extension to Trussler Road (2021); • An extension of the 201 Fischer-Hallman iXpress to Block Line Station and Conestoga College, via Block Line Road, Manitou Drive and Homer Watson Boulevard (2018); • An extension of the 200 iXpress with branded buses (ION Bus) to the South Cambridge Shopping Centre (2018); and • 206 Coronation iXpress, serving the King-Coronation corridor between Fairview Park Mall and West Galt, connecting to Fairway Station (2019).

The complete iXpress/ION network is shown in Figure 4.

2431830 Page 35 of 83 194 194 August 22, 2017 Report: TES-TRS-17-15

Figure 4: iXpress Network

2431830 Page 36 of 83 195 195 August 22, 2017 Report: TES-TRS-17-15

1.2 More Direct Routes

The implementation of ION and the corresponding completion of the iXpress network will enable the continued realignment of local routes to create a more grid-like pattern connecting with ION and iXpress. With ION providing frequent service in the Central Transit Corridor (CTC) and iXpress routes providing frequent service in complementary crosstown corridors, local routes can be restructured to minimize duplication of service and provide more direct service, thereby improving efficiency and travel time for most riders.

1.3 More Frequent Service

Frequent service is a key ridership growth initiative that can also address overcrowding conditions on busy routes. Today, only three GRT routes operate at a peak period headway of 10 minutes or better (7 Mainline, 9 Lakeshore, and 200 iXpress). It is proposed by 2021 that seven GRT routes, in addition to ION LRT, operate with 10- minute-or-better peak service, as shown in Figure 5:

Figure 5: GRT 10-minute Peak Service

2431830 Page 37 of 83 196 196 August 22, 2017 Report: TES-TRS-17-15

To foster increased ridership growth and support ION, it is recommended that during the life of this Business Plan GRT study the implementation of a comprehensive Frequent Service Network. A frequent route is commonly defined as having headways of 15 minutes or better, at least six days a week, for twelve hours a day. Expanding the geographic reach of frequent service across the Region, including more frequent service at off-peak times would be integrated with new marketing and customer navigation initiatives. Other mid-sized municipalities with rapid transit have implemented or are in the process of implementing frequent networks to complement their rapid transit line(s), including York Region, Ottawa, Portland, Salt Lake City, and Minneapolis.

2.0 Proposed Annual Service Improvements (2017-2021)

The following section outlines the proposed annual service improvements between 2017 and 2021 that are required to complete the 2021 Transit Network. The staging of annual service improvements is based on ION LRT beginning revenue service in late Spring 2018. Route alignments will be finalized through the annual service plan process, based on public feedback and detailed technical analysis, then presented to Regional Council for consideration during the annual budget process.

The table below summarizes the proposed annual service improvements between 2017 and 2021. A more detailed description of proposed service improvements for each year follows the summary table.

2431830 Page 38 of 83 197 197 August 22, 2017 Report: TES-TRS-17-15

Proposed Annual Service Improvements 2017-2021 (Table 1)

Time Improvements Existing Routes Period Affected* 2017  Frequency improvements 10, 27, 51, 52, 56,  Cambridge Centre Station 57, 61, 75, 110, 200,  New midday service 201, 202 iXpress  Alternative Service Delivery Pilot • (Approved in 2017 Budget based on Preliminary Business Plan report, August 2016) Early  Central Transit Corridor route restructuring 1, 2, 3, 4, 7, 8, 9, 11, 2018  Southwest Kitchener Phase 1A 12, 13, 14, 16, 20, 22,  North Waterloo 23, 27, 29, 31, 33, 73,  UW Transit Station 78, 92, 200, 201, 204,  Ottawa Street Corridor – 205 iXpress 205 iXpress introduced Fall  Southwest Kitchener Phase 1B 10, 61, 110, 116, 201 2018 iXpress

Fall  Completion of iXpress network 51, 52, 53, 54, 55, 57, 2019 . 200 ION Bus extended in 58, 59, 61, 62, 63, Cambridge 111, 200 ION Bus, . 206 Coronation iXpress introduced 206 iXpress  Cambridge Phase 1 . Galt, Preston 2020 -  Southwest Kitchener Phase 2 TBD 2021  Cambridge Phase 2 . Preston, L.G. Lovell Industrial Park, Cambridge Business Park  Northwest Waterloo Phase 2  Complete transition of routes from Charles Street Terminal to Downtown Kitchener ION stations  Frequency Improvements  Additional services to new growth areas and the Townships * Route numbers may change as route revisions are made

2431830 Page 39 of 83 198 198 August 22, 2017 Report: TES-TRS-17-15

2017 Service Plan

Service improvements in 2017 comprise four areas, and are shown in Figures 6 and 7:

• Frequency improvements on high-ridership routes, to address overcrowding and encourage ridership growth: Routes 10 and 110 (which travel between Fairview Park Mall and Conestoga College), and the 201/202 iXpress. • Midday service reintroduced to Routes 27 Chicopee and 57 Blair Road on weekdays. This would reverse service reductions made in 2014, improving transit accessibility to Freeport Hospital in the summer months and to West Galt year- round. • Alternative transit service delivery pilot program for a lower-demand area to be determined (see Applications for Alternative Service Models section for detail).

During the 2017 Regional Budget process, the implementation of the 205 Ottawa iXpress was deferred from September 2017 to April 2018.

2431830 Page 40 of 83 199 199 August 22, 2017 Report: TES-TRS-17-15

Figure 6: Proposed 2017 Service Improvements - Kitchener-Waterloo

2431830 Page 41 of 83 200 200 August 22, 2017 Report: TES-TRS-17-15

Figure 7: Proposed 2017 Service Improvements – Cambridge

2431830 Page 42 of 83 201 201 August 22, 2017 Report: TES-TRS-17-15

Proposed Late Spring 2018 Service Plan (for launch of ION LRT)

Major changes in the CTC (and adjacent areas) include:

• 200 iXpress – revised to operate from Fairway Station to Ainslie Street Terminal only, and re-branded as “ION Bus” with new vehicles. o Service between Conestoga Mall and Fairway would be replaced by ION LRT.

• Route 7 Mainline – streamlined from Fairway Station to Conestoga Station via King Street and Connaught Street. o Branches to the University of Waterloo (7D, 7E) would be replaced by ION LRT and increased service on the 201 and 202 iXpress. o A less-than-10-minute headway would be provided all-day on weekdays between Conestoga Mall and Downtown Kitchener. The King Street corridor between Uptown and Conestoga Mall continues to intensify through redevelopment, and will require a high level of service. A frequent Route 7 and ION are envisioned as complementary, core services that would provide an attractive and competitive alternative to auto travel in the CTC. o Route 7 would continue to provide access to areas in the CTC beyond the catchment of ION stations, which currently produce approximately 1,100 daily boardings.

• Route 9 Lakeshore – split into two routes, to provide more direct service. One route would serve the David Johnston Research & Technology Park and McCormick area; the other route would serve the Hazel Street corridor. The McCormick and Hazel areas are high ridership neighbourhoods that will no longer be served by the 200 iXpress and are beyond the catchment area of an LRT station. As a result, a high frequency of service on both local routes would be provided. This route would also provide service to the West Ring Road.

• New direct route on Weber Street from University Avenue to Fairway Road, connecting with Fairway Station and additional ION stations in Downtown Kitchener. This would replace portions of routes 4, 7 and 8, streamlining service in this major corridor parallel to ION.

2431830 Page 43 of 83 202 202 August 22, 2017 Report: TES-TRS-17-15

Some downtown routes (eg., Route 1 and 204 iXpress) would bypass Charles Street Terminal and facilitate transfers at the Central, Queen, or Frederick stations. Charles Street Terminal will continue to be used by intercity bus operators, including GO, Greyhound and Coach Canada and some GRT routes until the multi-modal hub at King and Victoria Streets is operational.

In Southwest Kitchener, routes would be realigned to connect to several ION stations. With a focus on connections at these locations, the Forest Glen Terminal will become redundant. Highlights include:

• Expanded local service to the Huron Village/Rosenberg communities. • More direct service between the Huron Business Park and ION LRT. • Extension of the 201 iXpress along Block Line Road to Courtland Avenue. • Implementation of the 205 Ottawa iXpress, which would provide a missing link connecting southeast and southwest Kitchener, integrating with ION LRT at Borden and Mill stations.

University of Waterloo Transit Plaza

Routes 9, 13, 31, 200 and 201 iXpress would be realigned to serve the new multi-modal transit station at the University of Waterloo. These routes would then be integrated with the University of Waterloo ION station.

Combined, the restructuring of CTC routes, Northwest Waterloo, and Southwest Kitchener routes would be completed in late spring 2018 without the addition of service hours or peak buses, through the reallocation of existing service. The reallocation of existing service would also fund the implementation of 10 minute peak frequency on the 201 and 202 iXpress lines. The streamlining of Route 7 and cancellation of the 200 iXpress between Conestoga and Fairway would make 22 peak buses and approximately 60,000 service hours available, which would be redeployed to provide the resources necessary to support the service changes described above.

2431830 Page 44 of 83 203 203 August 22, 2017 Report: TES-TRS-17-15

Figure 8: Proposed Network Changes in 2018

2431830 Page 45 of 83 204 204 August 22, 2017 Report: TES-TRS-17-15

Proposed Fall 2018 Service Plan

The proposed service changes for September 2018 relate to improved service to Conestoga College and to better integrate with ION LRT level of service (Figure 8). Highlights include:

Taken together with the ION launch improvements in Southwest Kitchener, these route changes would represent the completion of ‘Phase 1’ of transit improvements in this area of the Region. Further route extensions (and possible frequency improvements) are proposed in the draft 2021 Transit Network to serve new development/growth areas, such as Rosenberg and Doon South.

The September 2018 improvements are shown in Figure 8.

Proposed Fall 2019 Service Plan

Service changes in 2019 would focus on completing the iXpress network, by implementing the 206 Coronation iXpress along with an extension of ION Bus service in Cambridge.

The Coronation iXpress would provide a frequent, direct link between West Galt, Preston, Sportsworld and Fairway Station, providing a one-seat ride to ION LRT for some of the most dense, transit-supportive areas of Cambridge. An extension of ION Bus to the South Cambridge Shopping Centre would connect East Galt directly to Hespeler Road, also providing a one-seat ride to ION LRT at Fairway Station. This would reduce transfers at Ainslie Street Terminal, and provide frequent service to additional areas of Cambridge.

Many of the local routes in Cambridge would also be restructured at this time to connect with ION Bus stations, provide more of a grid network, reduce duplication with the Coronation iXpress, and improve hours of operation (Cambridge Phase 1). For example, with the introduction of the 206 Coronation iXpress, Route 52 would no longer have to travel to between Galt and Kitchener. Route 52 would be transformed into a local route connecting Galt, the Cambridge Memorial Hospital and the new Cambridge Centre transit passenger facility where numerous routes serving Hespeler, Preston and 2431830 Page 46 of 83 205 205 August 22, 2017 Report: TES-TRS-17-15

east Galt converge. The route 24 GO Bus to Milton also stops at the Cambridge Centre. Similarly, with the extension of the 200 iXpress along Cedar Street in southwest Galt and along Concession Street/Main Street in southeast Galt, most of the local routes would be restructured to complement the 200 iXpress extensions.

Proposed Fall 2020 and 2021 Service Plans

Any changes proposed for 2017-2019 that were not fully implemented would be programmed for this time period. In addition, the following improvements are contemplated on a conceptual level and are subject to further refinement:

• Route extensions to serve further development of the Rosenberg and Doon South communities (Southwest Kitchener Phase 2). • Streamlined, two-way service through Preston, the L.G. Lovell Industrial Park, and Cambridge Business Park (Cambridge Phase 2). • Route 31 Columbia extension to serve the development of the Clair Hills community (Northwest Waterloo Phase 2). • Complete permanent transition of routes from Charles Street Terminal to Downtown Kitchener ION stations, including the new King Victoria Transit Hub. • Additional frequency improvements on priority routes across the network.

Additional services to new growth areas and the Townships – described in more detail in the Alternative Service Models section.

3.0 Recommendations

1. That the transit service improvements detailed in Table 1 be further developed through the annual service plan process and presented to Regional Council for consideration during the annual budget process prior to implementation. 2. That staff continue to develop the concept of a Frequent Service Network (routes with 15 minute or better service frequency). A new route classification system would be evaluated and setup to introduce new service types, route numbers and a clearer customer navigation system to complement and support ION.

Applications for Alternative Service Models

1.0 Introduction and Background

Historically, the Region has endeavoured to provide conventional, fixed-route transit service within 450 metres to 95% of residents, places of work, and public facilities in the urban municipalities. This ‘service coverage’ standard has not been met, with the current network providing coverage for 87.5% of residents in the urban area. There are several reasons why achieving 95% service coverage with fixed-routes has been challenging and not necessarily desirable. These include: indirect, circuitous route 2431830 Page 47 of 83 206 206 August 22, 2017 Report: TES-TRS-17-15

patterns; less efficient, lower-performing service; and fewer resources for service along main corridors where transit is more competitive.

Areas that are challenging to serve with conventional transit service are the result of numerous factors such as 1) lack of a fine-grid of arterial and collector roads 2) neighbourhoods with circuitous street patterns, cul-de-sacs and limited number of connecting streets to back-lotted arterials, 3) lack of sidewalks and large building setbacks from roadway 4) physical barriers such as rivers, highways and extreme grades 5) lower-density and new growth areas, and 6) areas with senior’s buildings (or other transit-dependent facilities) located away from major corridors.

Alternative transit service delivery models should be explored for isolated transit- dependent facilities. Opportunities to retrofit sidewalks, roadway and walkway links that improve access to transit service should be pursued. In addition, staff will continue to work with Regional and municipal planners to ensure future development be designed be in closer proximity to existing and planned transit routes.

Taking the above into account, GRT will continue to use the 450 metres walk distance as a guideline for conventional service, but not a service standard. This does not preclude GRT from serving areas of lower population/employment density; however, fixed-route services will be focussed in areas with densities that can generate sufficient ridership and alternative service models will be considered for other areas as described below.

1.1 Network Redesign

During the last five years, implementation of additional iXpress routes along major corridors and the streamlining of local routes to travel more directly and frequently on arterial and collector roads has proven to be a more effective ridership growth strategy than trying to increase service coverage by deviating routes on local neighbourhood roads. Past experiences in other jurisdictions has shown that focusing service on existing high-ridership corridors and areas with high transit propensity (based on density, development pattern and demographics) results in higher ridership. This strategy has resulted in certain pockets of development being beyond a 450-metre walk to transit, as shown in Figure 9.

2431830 Page 48 of 83 207 207 August 22, 2017 Report: TES-TRS-17-15

Figure 9 – 2015 Network Coverage within 450m and Unserved Areas

*Remainder areas include: non-built-up areas, rural land within the urban municipalities, surplus land around expressways, the roadway network, and sparsely populated areas

1.2 Street Network and Community Design

While route design plays a role, longer walks to service can also occur due to the design of the street network and orientation of development. Subdivisions where street patterns are circuitous, cul-de-sacs proliferate, and there are a limited number of connections to back-lotted arterials make access to and provision of efficient transit challenging. This style of roadway layout hinders or prevents transit vehicles from accessing developments. A number of subdivisions within the urban area lack a complete and connective pedestrian network. Pedestrian access from the interior of neighborhoods to transit stops is limited, and walk distances are lengthy, even though a transit stop may geographically be in close proximity. Figure 10 illustrates one such subdivision in West Kitchener.

2431830 Page 49 of 83 208 208 August 22, 2017 Report: TES-TRS-17-15

Figure 10 – Challenging Subdivision and Street Design for Transit

1.3 Low-Density and New Growth Areas

There are also existing built-up areas where low residential or employment densities do not support a fixed-route service, and new growth areas where development (and the street network) is not built-out enough to deliver cost-effective service. These areas typically have a density of less than 5,000 people and jobs per square kilometre.

In addition, new growth areas where additional urban development is slated to occur have been identified in this Business Plan. Some are planned for new or expanded service between 2017 and 2021, while others would be served beyond 2021:

2431830 Page 50 of 83 209 209 August 22, 2017 Report: TES-TRS-17-15

New Growth Area Description of New Service Proposed by 2021

Beaver Creek TBD - contingency hours included in 2021 Network costing Meadows (Waterloo)

Branchton Park Revised conventional route with service on Dundas between (Cambridge) Franklin and Champlain

Chicopee/Sims Estate Route 27 turn-around at Chicopee Ski Hill rather than (Kitchener) Quinte/Morrison

Clair Hills (Waterloo) Route 31 extension via Sundew, Autumn Willow

Creekside New or revised BusPLUS service (Cambridge)

Doon South Conventional route extension via Strasburg Road, Robert (Kitchener) Ferrie, Doon South, Thomas Slee, New Dundee

Erb West (Waterloo) TBD - contingency hours included in 2021 Network costing

Hunt Club Beyond 2021 (Cambridge)

Kiwanis Park TBD - contingency hours included in 2021 Network costing (Waterloo)

Rosenberg Local route extension via Seabrook, Ludolph, Huron (Kitchener) New express service on Fischer-Hallman south of Westmount to Huron

Tartan/Rockcliffe Conventional route extensions on Strasburg, Huron (Kitchener)

UW Northwest TBD - contingency hours included in 2021 Network costing Campus (Waterloo)

Westview Beyond 2021 (Cambridge)

West Laurentian West 205 iXpress extension to Trussler (Kitchener)

2431830 Page 51 of 83 210 210 August 22, 2017 Report: TES-TRS-17-15

1.4 Location of Transit-Dependent Facilities

Transit-dependent facilities such as apartments, medical facilities, large employers or seniors’ complexes should be located on or within close distance to major transit nodes and corridors in order to be served effectively and efficiently. Unfortunately, when they are located in challenging or low-density areas as described above, the ability to provide cost-effective fixed-route transit service becomes limited. Figure 11 illustrates seniors’ facilities throughout the urban municipalities of the Region. The majority are directly adjacent to or near transit service, and residents, employees and visitors benefit from the close proximity to transit. There are a few of these facilities, however, that are located in these challenging areas beyond a 450-metre walk to transit.

Figure 11 – Seniors’ Housing and Transit Service in the Urban Municipalities

In order to serve these challenging areas and facilities that are outside walking distance to or challenging to serve with conventional transit in a more cost-effective, efficient manner than fixed-route service, alternative service delivery options need to be considered.

Figure 12 illustrates these challenging areas relative to higher-density parts of the urban area.

2431830 Page 52 of 83 211 211 August 22, 2017 Report: TES-TRS-17-15

Figure 12 – Challenging Areas to Serve by 2021

2.0 Potential Service Concepts

Providing closer transit access to the areas described above while avoiding the inefficient deployment of fixed-route transit services will require a ‘toolbox’ of transportation alternatives that GRT can employ beyond reasonable walking distance of existing or planned conventional routes. Five possible alternative transportation service delivery models that could be introduced in these areas include:

2.1 Community Bus Route

GRT currently operates one route that could be classified as a ‘community bus’ – Route 77 Wilmot, which operates between New Hamburg and the Boardwalk. There are several important characteristics of a community bus model that could serve as a template for other lower-density areas within the urban municipalities. First, the route is a pilot service funded through a grant. This allows GRT to test out the route with limited impact on other services. Second, it is customized to a specific time of day and travel pattern, based on the demands of the area. Third, a ‘flex-route’ option is offered, in which the bus may deviate within a set area to drop-off and pick-up customers who are not directly on the route alignment. Finally, it operates with a smaller vehicle instead of a conventional bus.

These operational characteristics could be implemented as necessary in other low- demand, low-density areas to connect riders to the core GRT network. The flexibility of the community bus model means services can be customized to the individualized 2431830 Page 53 of 83 212 212 August 22, 2017 Report: TES-TRS-17-15

needs of a community, which minimizes operating costs. For example, in a community where the primary need is transportation for seniors and disabled people to attend daytime activities, go shopping or attend medical appointments, routes that operate only in the midday period (from approximately 10:00 am to 3:00 pm) may be appropriate. Further to this concept, the same bus could serve two, three or more communities on different days during the week.

Assuming a cost of $72 per hour for GRT busPLUS service, a community bus option could potentially be operated for as little as $1,800 per week, or $93,600 per year for the operation of a route five hours a day, Monday through Friday.

2.2 Home-to-Hub

This model offers door-to-door pick-up of customers in a specified area with a 24-hour or subscription reservation, similar to MobilityPLUS. The service will transport the customers to the nearest conventional transit hub or terminal where they can transfer to other bus routes to complete their trip. Trips are provided by specialized transit buses and operators, and are scheduled and dispatched along with specialized trips over the course of the day. It is potentially more convenient than a community bus route, as it can be scheduled to arrive at a pre-arranged time (as opposed to operating on a fixed schedule) and comes directly to the customer’s door. Oakville Transit currently operates services in some newer communities with this model.

The cost of service would depend on the number of trips operated from each area. However, at an average cost for paratransit trips of about $30 per day, areas that generate 20 trips per weekday could be offered within each area for about $150,000 per year.

2.3 Subsidized Taxi

Many transit agencies in North America have entered into co-operative agreements with taxi operators to offer subsidized services to potential transit customers that need service in lower-demand areas or times of the day. Trips originating or ending within certain areas would be designated as eligible, while others would not. This concept has three elements: regulation of the service provided, negotiation with the taxi provider to achieve favourable rates for transit users, and setting subsidy rates to the taxi company. Because the transit agency is providing the taxi company with the opportunity to carry additional trips each year and guarantees payment on a lump sum basis, the agency may be able to negotiate lower rates or other concessions on trips which will allow them to provide more service. Customers can be required to pay a part of the cost of the taxi trip in much the same way as they pay the transit fare. GRT has experience with this model through the taxi scrip program for MobilityPLUS clients.

Costs would be dependent on the number of trips provided, the regulation of trip lengths 2431830 Page 54 of 83 213 213 August 22, 2017 Report: TES-TRS-17-15

and times, and the prices arranged with the taxi providers. However, average subsidy amounts are unlikely to exceed $20 - $30 per trip, potentially making such a service cost effective in areas where 20-30 trips are generated daily.

2.4 Ridesharing

Services like Uber and RideCo are a relatively new transportation option similar to taxis, but provided by Transportation Network Companies (TNCs). These services are summoned (and paid for) using a mobile phone app. Those who drive are generally not professional drivers, and perform the service on an ad-hoc basis. Prices of ridesharing services are generally lower than comparable trips using taxis. However, they use a demand-based pricing system, in which customers pay higher prices for trips during periods of peak demand. There may be opportunities to integrate these services with public transit, such as supplementing transit service in locations and during periods when it cannot be provided efficiently. Most of the issues concerning the regulation, negotiation and subsidies discussed above with regard to taxi service also apply to ridesharing, with some additional caveats. Users must have smartphones and credit cards in order to use them. Many GRT customers, particularly elderly and lower-income users may lack one or both of these amenities. Transit agencies in other areas are exploring ways to overcome these issues. For example, transit agency dispatchers could potentially book trips on behalf of customers that have access to standard telephones but not smartphones. Customers without credit cards could potentially set up pre-paid accounts with the transit agency or be billed by the agency as part of a larger integrated fare payment scheme to avoid the impediment of credit card payment.

2.5 Partnership with Volunteer Transportation Services

Volunteer-run, community organizations such as Community Support Connections (CSC) currently offer escorted transportation for seniors or adults with a disability to attend medical or daily living appointments in the Region. The cost for the user is about 50% greater than a transit fare. Benefits of this model are that door-to-door service can be provided, passenger assistance is offered, and these service providers are well established in the community. There would also be no cost to the Region to implement this service. However, there would be no on-demand, spontaneous trip making, which is possible with a fixed-route transit service.

Staff recognizes that there are more alternative models than the five described above. To address this and develop internal buy-in and support for new service models, staff plan to hold a workshop over 1-2 business days in early 2017 to consider innovative ways to meet community and user needs within lower-density, challenging areas. The workshop will be made up of a diverse cross section of staff from various departments and divisions to avoid a ‘siloed’ approach, encourage innovative thinking, and ensure different viewpoints on service provision are considered.

2431830 Page 55 of 83 214 214 August 22, 2017 Report: TES-TRS-17-15

3.0 Application to Challenging Urban Areas

As described above, challenging areas to serve within the urban municipalities include the following:

• Areas outside the redesigned grid network by 2021 • Areas with a transit-prohibitive street network/community design • Low-density areas that could not support regular bus service • New growth areas • Senior’s buildings or other transit-dependent facilities located outside major corridors

3.1 Prioritization of Areas

Because there are multiple areas in all three urban municipalities of the Region that are outside walking distance to transit, and limited resources to serve them all, staff have developed a ‘prioritization matrix’ to catalogue and prioritize areas for alternative service model implementation as part of the 2017-2021 Business Plan. Unserved areas that currently exist or that would exist with the implementation of the draft 2021 Transit Network are considered. These areas include established urban neighbourhoods that are beyond the walk distance standard due to realignment of routes, that never had GRT service, and new growth areas that are currently developing.

Areas can be prioritized for service based on various service, density and demand criteria, including: residential and employment density, presence of a seniors’ facility, customer requests for service, and whether a future conventional route is planned in the draft 2021 Transit Network. Primary or ‘A’ priorities would become candidates for higher-order alternative service models, such as a community bus route. Secondary or ‘B’ priorities would become candidates for a more ‘on-demand’ alternative service model such as subsidized taxi or ridesharing, as discussed above. Areas that do not meet the prioritization criteria would not be considered for transit service, including alternative service models.

3.2 Recommended Pilot Service Areas

The approved 2017 Regional Budget includes funding for an alternative service delivery pilot program. Staff have engaged a consultant to assist in the development of the pilot which subject to Council approval would be implemented in Fall 2017.

The following four ‘Priority A’ areas (Figure 13) would be evaluated to determine the feasibility of implementing an alternative delivery service pilot. Additional locations may be included during the study process. Implementation will be subject to the funding amount approved in the 2017 budget and any additional implementation of alternative service delivery options would be subject to future budget approvals 2431830 Page 56 of 83 215 215 August 22, 2017 Report: TES-TRS-17-15

• Columbia Forest in Waterloo (roughly bounded by Erbsville Road, Columbia Forest Boulevard, Munich Circle and Columbia Street) • Highland West/Blackwell in Kitchener (roughly bounded by Blackwell Drive, Westheights Drive, and Victoria Street) • Trinity Village/Kingsway in Kitchener near Fairview Park Mall, Kitchener • Central Hespeler in Cambridge (roughly bounded by Rife Avenue, Cooper Street, Gunn Avenue, and Franklin Boulevard)

Figure 13 – Four Priority ‘A’ Areas for an Alternative Service Delivery Pilot Program in 2017

These areas have: a residential and employment density to support a minimum level of transit (2,500 persons and jobs per square kilometre by 2021); a population greater than 1,000 outside the walk distance to transit, once the proposed 2018 network changes take place; no fixed-route conventional service planned in the draft 2021 Transit Network; a seniors’ facility present; and rank in the top 50% of areas by number of customer requests for new service.

2431830 Page 57 of 83 216 216 August 22, 2017 Report: TES-TRS-17-15

4.0 Application to Townships

In addition to providing transit service to the urbanized portion of Waterloo Region, GRT also has jurisdiction to provide fixed-route service in the townships. The township areas are predominately rural, and have population and employment densities far below the levels to warrant fixed-route service.

However, each of the townships contain one or more ‘settlement areas’—former villages and hamlets developed to serve farming communities in the 19th and early 20th centuries, located at rural crossroads, some of which have grown significantly with suburban-style development over the past sixty years. These locations have significant localized densities and in some cases contain nodes of employment, and a portion of their population is transit-dependent or exhibit high transit demand. Unfortunately, they are separated from the contiguous urban area of higher densities by a significant distance over which there is little or no development density. When the low density of this area to be traversed is averaged with the higher density of the proposed area to be served, the average density is usually well below the level that would be required operate transit service efficiently.

The potential transit demand between these settlement areas and the urbanized area (and within the settlement areas themselves) does not always support a fixed-route GRT service. Alternative service delivery strategies can more efficiently serve settlement areas, providing a basic level of transportation connectivity to the rest of the region. In addition, social changes including the aging of the population, immigration and increasing economic polarization, means that transit demand in these areas is likely to increase in coming years.

The alternative service models described in the section above will be considered for implementation in the townships in addition to the urban areas. However, there is a separate process for implementing township service due to the area-rating of transit services.

4.1 Existing Services

GRT currently operates two routes that serve portions of the townships:

• Route 21 Elmira - Conestoga Mall • Route 77 Wilmot

These routes operate differently, as described below.

Route 21 Elmira-Conestoga Mall connects Elmira and St. Jacobs in Woolwich Township to the Conestoga Mall transit terminal in Waterloo. At Conestoga Mall, it meets a number of other GRT routes: 6, 7, 9, 12, 14, 31, and the 200, 201 and 202

2431830 Page 58 of 83 217 217 August 22, 2017 Report: TES-TRS-17-15

iXpress. The route also will meet ION LRT at its northern terminus when ION begins service in 2018. Route 21 provides regular local bus service operating at a half-hour headway during the peak period, and hourly during the midday period on weekdays. The service operates from around 6:00 AM to 7:00 PM. Saturday service is every 30 minutes during the morning and afternoon periods, and every 40 minutes during the midday period, operating from about 7:00 AM to 4:00 PM. There is no service on Sundays. On Thursdays during summer months when the St. Jacobs Market is open, the route operates from St. Jacobs to Conestoga Mall every 15 minutes during the midday.

Route 77 Wilmot connects new Hamburg, Baden, and Petersburg in Wilmot Township to The Boardwalk transit terminal in Kitchener. At The Boardwalk, it meets a number of other GRT routes: 1, 4, 5, 13, 20, 29, and the 202 and 204 iXpress. The route runs a limited schedule during the peak period, operating three trips in each direction between 7:00 AM and 10:00 AM and four trips between 2:30 and 7:30 PM.

Two of the key benefits from this service are allowing students from Waterloo Oxford District Secondary School to travel into Kitchener-Waterloo after school to access activities and part-time jobs, and providing access to and from the city for medical appointments for seniors in the New Hamburg-Baden area.

Route 77 uses the ‘busPLUS’ service model for providing trips to lower-density areas. The route also features some ‘community bus’ components, such as flex routing, which allows it to serve the lower-density areas of the route effectively. Flex routing is offered in designated areas off the main alignment, including the Boardwalk Medical Centre, Forrest and Hincks, Stonecroft, Nithview, Morningside and the Wilmot Recreation Complex. Flex routing allows the bus to travel off the main route to pick up passengers who call ahead to request service; these areas are shown in Figure 14 below. Riders can call the same day for flex routing requests from 8:00 AM to 5:00 PM. Flex route stops are clearly marked, indicating that they are serviced upon request only.

2431830 Page 59 of 83 218 218 August 22, 2017 Report: TES-TRS-17-15

Figure 14: Map of Route 77 Wilmot with Flex Routing Areas Another element is the use of smaller, accessible paratransit vehicles more appropriate for lower passenger loads. The vehicle type used by Route 77 is shown in Figure 15. These buses do not have bicycle racks and are not bicycle accessible. The vehicles will be replaced in 2017 with new low-floor models that will also be equipped with bike racks.

Route 77 began operation on April 25, 2016 as a one-year Community Transportation Pilot Project, funded by a MTO grant, with non- financial participation of Township of Wilmot, Community Care Concepts, Wilmot Family Resource Centre and Kiwanis Transit. The service is operated by Voyageur Transportation under contract with the Regional Municipality of Waterloo.

Figure 15: Vehicle used for Route Regional Council approved the continuation of 77 Wilmot. the route as part of regular GRT operations during the 2017 Budget process. Additional MTO funding was secured to allow a modest expansion of service in 2017-18.

Based on preliminary analysis of the service, ridership is estimated at about 80 to 90

2431830 Page 60 of 83 219 219 August 22, 2017 Report: TES-TRS-17-15

customers per day, or about 10 to 11 customers per hour. Along with monitoring the ridership levels, a survey of riders on the service was conducted on board the vehicle to help determine how effective the service is at meeting the needs of the township residents. Working with the collaborating agencies, residents that have not been served by the new service were also consulted to determine what changes would be effective.

Staff continue to have discussions with Township staff and elected officials on potential service delivery options that would connect township communities into the conventional regional transit network. Potential implementation of additional future services to Townships is subject to Township and Regional approvals.

5.0 Recommendations

1. That an alternative service delivery pilot be implemented in 2017 to serve one or more identified seniors’ facility that is currently beyond the walk distance standard. 2. That opportunities to retrofit sidewalks, pedestrian and roadway links that improve access to transit be evaluated, and funds be requested in future capital budgets. 3. That staff continue to work with Regional and municipal planners to ensure future development is designed to be in close proximity, and oriented towards existing and planned transit routes. 4. That staff continue to have discussions with Township staff and elected officials on potential service delivery options that would connect Township communities into the conventional regional transit network.

2431830 Page 61 of 83 220 220

Report: TES-TRS-17-15

Appendix B: GANTT Chart – ION Integration Task List

2431830 Page 62 of 83 221 221 August 22, 2017 Report: TES-TRS-17-15

2431830 Page 63 of 83 222 222 August 22, 2017 Report: TES-TRS-17-15

Appendix C: Example University Of Waterloo ION Station Profile

2431830 Page 64 of 83 223 223 August 22, 2017 Report: TES-TRS-17-15

2431830 Page 65 of 83 224 224 August 22, 2017 Report: TES-TRS-17-15

2431830 Page 66 of 83 225 225 August 22, 2017 Report: TES-TRS-17-15

2431830 Page 67 of 83 226 226 August 22, 2017 Report: TES-TRS-17-15

2431830 Page 68 of 83 227 227 August 22, 2017 Report: TES-TRS-17-15

2431830 Page 69 of 83 228 228 August 22, 2017 Report: TES-TRS-17-15

2431830 Page 70 of 83 229 229 August 22, 2017 Report: TES-TRS-17-15

2431830 Page 71 of 83 230 230 August 22, 2017 Report: TES-TRS-17-15

2431830 Page 72 of 83 231 231 August 22, 2017 Report: TES-TRS-17-15

Appendix D: Marketing Program Strategies and Activities Activity Description 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021

1. Build a Establish and evolve GRT’s organizational • • • • • strong GRT master brand and service brand house. organization • Placement of GRT logo on ION Bus and ION LRV al brand • Collect inventory of brand placement on

signage, bus stops • Update GRT style guide • Refresh identity • Roll out new service brand placement 2. GRT Amplify role of GRT in the community with • • • • Organizatio campaign to express GRT staff’s role in the daily n Brand lives of commuters and community.

Launch Introduce “Today” “Yesterday” “Last Week” & Programs campaign for unnoticed acts of service and kindness from GRT employees that have helped commuters in some way.

Implement a Public Engagement Program – “You Ask, We’ll Answer” that encourages and allows the public to ask a question to GRT. • Develop mini road shows that educate public on key GRT initiatives. Provide incentives to attend (eg. Free monthly passes) and local business prize sponsorship. • Establish centralized method to address frequently asked questions through a series of live chats on the website. • Promote across all media • Publish questions and answers on website

2431830 Page 73 of 83 232 232 August 22, 2017 Report: TES-TRS-17-15

Activity Description 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021

Develop Campaign for “We have the Best Riders” to show prospective riders that the GRT experience is reliable, clean and respectful. • Communicate “rider’s code” at ION stations, passenger stations, interior bus/train, website to create positive perception of how good and respectful GRT riders are. • Use social media to promote 3. ION new Develop a multi-phase strategy to create ION • • service awareness, promote ION safety and benefits, awareness and launch ION service. Develop campaign in collaboration with TDM staff.

ION Safety • Develop safety awareness campaign, educate public on electrification of test track and vehicle testing • Familiarize public with how to stay safe when driving, cycling, walking and playing in close proximity to ION trains.

ION– first train arrival • Promotion of first train arrival and VIP preview ION is coming - ” Benefits Awareness Program”

Develop video and permanent displays on benefits of transit that aligns with target rider personas. • Personal time and money savings, and more

2431830 Page 74 of 83 233 233 August 22, 2017 Report: TES-TRS-17-15

Activity Description 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021

comfortable ride on ION • Enhanced travel opportunities • Positive environmental and local economic impact • Technological innovations with ION

ION is coming – prelaunch • All stations featured on different days leading up to opening day • Activities with local business promotion • Street team – how to pay education and EasyGO fare card distribution • School student safety days • Neighbourhood station awareness • Seniors tea on transit day

ION - Ride today • Sponsored/free rides • Information booths, EasyGO fare card distribution • Station themes (kids play, live music, local business theme, food and beverage offerings).

Post ION launch “The Future of Transit” Program • University and Highs School student contest program to encourage sharing of views on the future of public transit and of their riding experiences.

2431830 Page 75 of 83 234 234 August 22, 2017 Report: TES-TRS-17-15

Activity Description 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021

• Social media program to allow the public to tag their experiences on ION with a predefined #hashtag which can be used in future marketing activities. 4. GRT Service “Why GRT?” Travel Mode Shift Program • Brand Target personas have diverse reasons to use Programs public transit. Develop campaign in collaboration with TDM staff and established workplace TDM program, TravelWise.

Implement outdoor billboard campaign targeting auto users to: • Reduce auto use – try transit once per week, Let’s make transit cool” Video campaign to evoke pride in existing riders and attract new generation of riders. • “GRT Elevated Experience” Program Partnering with retailers, as well as food and beverage companies to refine the rider experience. • Create social media trivia contests • Engage retailers to provide incentives or coupons to promote their locations exclusive for riders 5. Electronic Explain and promote the benefits of the new • • Fare System electronic fare system and EasyGO fare Card and EasyGO • Increase customer and employee awareness of one system, one card fare card • Promote and educate on the use of the new electronic fareboxes

2431830 Page 76 of 83 235 235 August 22, 2017 Report: TES-TRS-17-15

Activity Description 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021

• Promote and encourage the use of the EasyGO fare card • Create street team to distribute fare cards • Provide training to the public and employees on how the system works • Educate public and employees about the service/fare card 6. Renew Evolve GRT Web and Digital Platforms that • • Digital reflect GRT master brand and its service brands Marketing • Integrate ION brand into GRT Website • including Integrate social media, consolidate information tools, and be more mobile Brand friendly Utilities • Provide online digital application forms with work flows for customer convenience and improvement to response time • Launch new website Develop digital marketing strategy to attract new riders to transit through • Facebook paid ads • Online native ad units • Google display and video ads • Search engine marketing (SEM) & search engine optimization (SEO) • Other social media platforms: Twitter, Snapchat, Instagram Update GRT app to be multi-platform mobile application • Provides one-stop experience • Intuitive wayfinding, trip planning,

2431830 Page 77 of 83 236 236 August 22, 2017 Report: TES-TRS-17-15

Activity Description 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021

scheduling, ticket purchase, loyalty, community activities and more 7. Employee “It’s Our GRT” Employee Engagement • • • Engagemen Programs t Communicate to employees the positive impact of GRT initiatives • Enhance feedback mechanisms for employees to share their experiences and suggestions • Regularly seek input from key staff on current and planned services, and on how training and communication can be improved • Produce a series of instructional videos to inform and train staff on how/what to communicate to customers 8. Guerilla & “Engaging at Street Level” • • Event Hire and train street team of staff for public Marketing outreach and presence at local community events

Brand vehicle with EasyGO fare card to provide visual recognition. Focus on introducing riders to new electronic fare card 9. Loyalty “Leveraging the Smart Card for Loyalty” • • • Marketing Launch loyalty program that will be the primary tool to retain the loyalty of existing riders. Reward riders for their use of the card and promote this as an attraction: • E.g. some free rides after set amount of rides taken

2431830 Page 78 of 83 237 237 August 22, 2017 Report: TES-TRS-17-15

Activity Description 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021

• E.g. local business discounts with presentation of EasyGO fare card 10. Community “Involving the Community — A New Way • • • • • Outreach Forward for Waterloo Region”

Encourage the use of transit through travel training programs

Develop new and innovative outreach methods 11. Cooperative Create partnerships with local businesses and • • Marketing organizations for cross-promotional opportunities.

Reach out to established TravelWise businesses for co-promotional opportunities and/or incentivize businesses in exchange for TravelWise membership.

Promote services on digital screens kiosks in major shopping malls, inserts in company organization newsletters.

2431830 Page 79 of 83 238 238 August 22, 2017 Report: TES-TRS-17-15

Appendix E: Intelligent Transportation System – Major Components Summary

Short Term Medium Term Funding Priority (2017 – 2018) (2019 – 2020) Future (yes/no) (low/medium/high) Capital Cost Capital Cost (2021 +) A – Ongoing System Expansion and Maintenance $4,300/bus $1,000,000 total A1 – Transit Signal Priority on all [232 buses to be conventional buses Yes high upgraded] $250,000 A2 – Communications upgrade VMS Yes high [133 VMS] Partial funding, A3 – Communications upgrade Smart requires $1.6M Bus additional medium [250 buses] A4 – HASTUS upgrade to real-time info Yes medium $1,200,000 A5 - Additional Real-time Passenger Information Displays Yes high $1,200,000 A6 - Integration / Enhancement of On-board video system Yes high $50,000 A7 – Integration/Enhancement with Yes through ION LRT LRT project high $150,000 - $200,000 A8 – Integration with GO TripLinx Yes high N/A B – Operational Enhancements B1 – Vehicle Health Monitoring $500,000 [250 System No low buses] B2 – Bus Control System No low $1,900,000

2431830 Page 80 of 83 239 239 August 22, 2017 Report: TES-TRS-17-15

Short Term Medium Term Funding Priority (2017 – 2018) (2019 – 2020) Future (yes/no) (low/medium/high) Capital Cost Capital Cost (2021 +) No, additonal funding B3 – Vehicle Depot Management required due System to reallocation high $330,000 B4 – Asset Management System Yes high N/A B5 – Pedestrian Collision Avoidance $3 M [250 System No low buses] B6 - Data Management to support Performance Management Partial funding medium $150,000 C – Enhanced Functionality and Future Initiatives C1 – Crowdsourcing and Social Media Staff position high N/A $50,000 - $500,000 [dependent on number of data C2 – Open Source Data No medium sources] $500,000 - $5,000,000 Opportunities for private C3 - Intermodal Traveller Information No low partnership Multi-million dollar investment depending on the C4 – Autonomous Vehicle No low scale of the pilot Multi-million C5- Easy GO Electronic Fare Payment No low dollar investment

2431830 Page 81 of 83 240 240 August 22, 2017 Report: TES-TRS-17-15

Short Term Medium Term Funding Priority (2017 – 2018) (2019 – 2020) Future (yes/no) (low/medium/high) Capital Cost Capital Cost (2021 +) $100,000 – $200,000 Planning- Internal Technology conversations could review and begin to determine if development of $200,000 - C6 – Family of Services Planning No low there is a benefit. approach $5,000,000

2431830 Page 82 of 83 241 241 August 22, 2017 Report: TES-TRS-17-15

Appendix F: Projected Ridership and Financial Performance of 5 Year Plan

2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 Actuals Service TOTAL 762,000 778,000 865,000 933,000 983,000 1,035,000 Hours LRT 0 0 37,000 55,000 55,000 57,000 BUS 762,000 778,000 828,000 878,000 928,000 978,000 Ridership 19.7 20.0 21.8 24.3 26.6 28.3 (millions) Operating Cost $82.2 $88.9 $108.3 $121.3 $130.0 $137.8 (millions) Passenger Revenue $31.4 $32.4 $35.7 $40.5 $45.4 $49.9 (millions) System Revenue $32.2 $33.2 $36.6 $41.3 $46.2 $50.7 Net Operating $50.0 $55.7 $71.7 $80.0 $83.8 $87.1 Cost Net Operating $2.58 $2.82 $3.33 $3.32 $3.18 $3.11 Cost per Rider Revenue/ Cost 39.2% 37.3% 33.8% 34.1% 35.6% 36.8% Ratio

2431830 Page 83 of 83 242 242

Report: TES-TRS-17-19 Region of Waterloo Transportation and Environmental Services Transit Services

To: Chair Tom Galloway and Members of the Planning & Works Committee

Date: August 22, 2017 File Code: D28-60(A)

Subject: EasyGO Fare Card Project Update

Recommendation:

For information.

Summary:

The new farebox installation will be completed by the end of August 2017. However the full launch of the companion EasyGO Fare Card is delayed until January 2018 due to software and installation challenges with the Customer Service Terminals, which are needed to issue fare cards, and delays with development of the customer service web portal. Together, these issues will delay the EasyGO card release and the transition to electronic fare payment by approximately 5 months.

Since the two local Universities are issuing student identification which is compatible with the Electronic Fare Management System (EFMS), theses cards will interface with the new fareboxes and will be active in September 2017 for the U-Pass program, which represents approximately 30% of GRT ridership.

Delivery of Fare Vending Machines for ION platforms is delayed by 3 months until October, 2017 as a result of issues with environmental testing. Despite the delay, these devices are expected to be delivered, tested and deployed for the start of ION service.

Report:

The Region’s Electronic Fare Management System (EFMS) project is moving towards launch of the new EasyGO Fare Card; however release of the card has been delayed until January 2018. This delay is the result of unforeseen software issues with the

2488008 Page 1 of 3 243 243 August 22, 2017 Report: TES-TRS-17-19

Customer Service Terminals, which are needed to initially issue and reload fare cards, and other challenges with final development of the customer web portal, which is used by customers to reload value onto previously issued fare cards.

In addition the installation of the new Customer Service Terminals requires a redesign of the service counter at Charles Street Terminal, to accommodate the new devices. While this was anticipated, the design has proved more challenging than expected.

The Customer Web Portal is still in testing mode. While the function of the portal is generally acceptable, some changes are needed to improve usability before cards are launched. The web portal will also require a visual update to match the recently updated GRT web site.

These delays affect all tasks that follow them and as a result the schedule for the remainder of Phase 1 of the EFMS project has been updated as outlined in the table below.

Milestone Planned Updated Completion Date Completion Date

Completion of farebox installations July 31, 2017 August 31, 2017

Customer Services Terminal (CST) July 31, 2017 October 2017 deployment at GRT Terminals

Card pilot N/A December 31, 2017

EasyGO Fare Card release August 1, 2017 January 1, 2018

Fare Media Transition December 31, 2017 May 30, 2018

Farebox installations are complete for 178 buses operating out of Strasburg Road Transit Centre. Installation on 56 buses operating from Conestoga Boulevard garage is expected to conclude in August.

Integration of U-Pass functionality will proceed as planned, with university Student IDs becoming capable of electronic validation in September, 2017. U-Pass riders represent approximately 30% of GRT ridership.

ION Device Delivery

Fare Vending Machines for ION platforms initially scheduled for delivery in July, 2017 are now delayed until October, 2017. This delay is the result of issues identified during environmental testing that necessitated a minor redesign of the machine, as well as updated components sourced from subcontractors. These devices will be delivered for

2488008 Page 2 of 3 244 244 August 22, 2017 Report: TES-TRS-17-19

testing in fall, 2017 and will be installed on platforms in time of ION launch. Platform Validators are not delayed and will be installed as planned in fall 2017.

Corporate Strategic Plan:

Council’s Strategic Focus area 2.1: Create a public transportation network that is integrated, accessible, affordable and sustainable.

Financial Implications:

The 2017 GRT Capital Budget includes $2,506,000 (Project 66059) to complete the EasyGO fare system for conventional transit, MobilityPLUS and busPlus services to be funded from development charges (9%; $226,000) and tax supported debentures (91%; $2,280,000).

Debt servicing costs to be reflected in future GRT operating budgets are projected to be $267,000 annually over a period of ten years based on an estimated cost of borrowing of 3.00%

The approved 2017 Rapid Transit Capital Budget also includes $3,798,000 for the implementation of the EasyGO fare system on ION, to be funded within the overall $818 million Rapid Transit Capital Project Budget.

Costs associated with installation support, card distribution and marketing will be funded from these capital budgets as part of the project implementation.

Other Department Consultations/Concurrence:

Attachments

Nil

Prepared By: Gethyn Beniston, Project Manager

Approved By: Thomas Schmidt, Commissioner, Transportation and Environmental Services

2488008 Page 3 of 3 245 245

Report: TES-TRP-17-16 Region of Waterloo Transportation and Environmental Services Transportation

To: Chair Tom Galloway and Members of the Planning and Works Committee

Date: August 22, 2017 File Code: T08-70/MTCS

Subject: Revised Upset Limit for the Purchase of Traffic Signal Controllers

Recommendation:

Summary:

Based on annual spending since 2015, the cost of providing traffic signal controllers to support the Transportation Capital Program, which includes the traffic controller replacement program, road reconstruction and expansion projects, new warranted signals as well as replacements due to unexpected damage, etc., has increased. The projected annual cost for the traffic control equipment for 2017 and subsequent years is more than the current upset limit of $400,000.

Therefore in order to continue to facilitate the growing Transportation Capital Program, staff is recommending an increase in the annual upset cost from $400,000 to $700,000. Staff continue to believe this sole-source arrangement with Econolite is providing best value for the Region.

2441885 Page 1 of 8 246 246 August 22, 2017 Report: TES-TRP-17-16

The Region has previously purchased Econolite TSC under Part VII, Section 21-I of the Region’s Purchasing By-law, which allows the Chief Purchasing Officer to acquire goods or services through negotiation where the acquisition is beneficial in regard to the standardization of goods or services for the Region.

Report:

1.0 Background

On September 23, 2015, Regional Council approved the Chief Purchasing Officer to enter into negotiations with Econolite Canada Incorporated for the supply of traffic signal controllers and ancillary equipment at an upset limit of $400,000 annually plus applicable taxes as described in Report TES-TRP-15-16, attached as Appendix A. The term of this arrangement was not to exceed five (5) years. As per Report TES-TRP-15-16, Econolite was recommended by staff as the sole-source provider of traffic signal controllers because of the high quality and competitive price of the Econolite products and the benefits of standardization of the equipment. Also, Econolite was the selected product line to meet key functional data upload, download and real-time monitoring specifications of the Region’s new ARIA traffic signal control system.

2.0 Reasons for Increased Annual Cost

The $400,000 annual upset limit outlined in Report TES-TRP-15-16 was developed using historical annual traffic signal controller and ancillary equipment purchase trends for the Transportation Capital Program prior to 2015. Since the original Council approval in 2015, the Region’s annual costs for the supply of traffic signal controllers (TSC) and ancillary equipment has increased to the point in which the original $400,000 upset limit is no longer sufficient. The number of traffic signal controllers needed to complete the annual Transportation Capital Program has increased. In addition, the unit cost per traffic signal location has increased due to a number of reasons. The main reasons the annual cost increased were as follows:

• Econolite was the selected product line to meet key functionality of the Region’s new ARIA Traffic Management System upgrade completed in early 2017 which required replacement of a number of antiquated field controllers; • 252 of the 500 existing TSC are not able to function using evolving data communication protocols; • Increased number of intersections requiring new traffic signals; • For new installations, the initial installation of temporary traffic signals prior to permanent installation of traffic signals or roundabouts; • Road reconstruction/expansion projects are requiring more temporary traffic

2441885 Page 2 of 8 247 247 August 22, 2017 Report: TES-TRP-17-16

controller equipment installations to maintain traffic throughout the construction period; • Limited number of usable recycled traffic signal equipment available for temporary installations; • Unpredictable number of signal controller cabinets damaged from motor vehicle collisions and weather related damage like lightning strikes; • The cost to manufacture traffic signal control equipment due to the fluctuating Canadian dollar; and • New Regional requirements to add Uninterrupted Power Supply (UPS) units in specific traffic controller cabinets at signalized locations, also known as “battery backup units”.

3.0 Benefit of Sole-Sourcing to Econolite

Staff have reviewed the previous reasons for the sole-source procurement of TSC from Econolite and have concluded that these reasons are still valid, which are:

• TSC components are not easily interchangeable and not fully compatible between different manufacturers; • Ensures consistent methods of programming TSC and Traffic Management System for staff; • Minimized variation of spare part and material stock inventories; • Econolite provides advanced staff training; • Grandlinq installed the Econolite Centracs Traffic Management System for the new light rail transit system, including Econolite TSC, which the Region will operate and maintain; • Econolite continually provides ongoing enhancements to operational compatibility and integration with the Region’s Traffic Management System; • Continued no-charge support for the majority of legacy products; • Existing TSC plant manufactured by Econolite; and • No major advancements of competitor’s product.

4.0 Recommendation

Based on the high quality, excellent service and competitive price of the Econolite TSC and in order to provide a well functioning and reliable transportation network, the Region recommends the continued sole-source procurement of the Econolite TSC and ancillary traffic control equipment as per the terms of Report TES-TRP-15-16.

2441885 Page 3 of 8 248 248 August 22, 2017 Report: TES-TRP-17-16

Staff is recommending an increase in the annual upset spending limit from $400,000 to $700,000.

Staff will continue to monitor and evaluate the performance and value of using the Econolite equipment compared with competitors’ products to ensure the Region continues to receive the best possible return on its investment.

Corporate Strategic Plan:

This report addresses the Region’s Strategic Focus Objective 2.4 – Optimize road capacity to safely manage traffic and congestion.

Financial Implications:

The annual cost for traffic signal controllers and ancillary equipment is estimated to be $700,000. The 2017 Transportation Capital Program includes adequate funds to purchase the required equipment to complete the program including:

Roads Rehabilitation Reserve:

• $200,000 annually for traffic signal controller replacements; and • $275,000 annually for traffic signal modernization.

Development Charge Reserve Fund:

• $150,000 for traffic controller field timer component installation for the Traffic Signal Control System upgrade; and • Balance to be funded from individual capital projects.

Other Department Consultations/Concurrence:

Corporate Services, Procurement

Attachments

Appendix A – Report TES-TRP-15-16

Prepared By: Egerton Heath, Supervisor Traffic Systems Management

Approved By: Thomas Schmidt, Commissioner, Transportation and Environmental Services

2441885 Page 4 of 8 249 249 Appendix A Report: TES-TRP-17-16

2441885 Page 5 of 8 250 250 A-2 Report: TES-TRP-17-16

2441885 Page 6 of 8 251 251 A-3 Report: TES-TRP-17-16

2441885 Page 7 of 8 252 252 A-4 Report: TES-TRP-17-16

2441885 Page 8 of 8 253 253

Council Enquiries and Requests for Information Planning and Works Committee Anticipated Response Meeting date Requestor Request Assigned Department Date

08-Dec-15 J. Mitchell Report on using Renewable Energy for LRT TES Fall 2017

Report on Vision Zero Movement and how 06-Dec-16 J. Nowak the Region can achieve the basic objective TES Fall 2017

122904