CITY of DUNCAN Agenda Committee of the Whole Meeting Tuesday, September 2, 2014 @ 6:00 P.M

Page 1 of 247

CITY OF DUNCAN Agenda Committee of the Whole Meeting Tuesday, September 2, 2014 @ 6:00 p.m. Committee Room, City Hall, 200 Craig Street, Duncan, BC

Page #

1. Call to Order

2. Introduction of Late Items

3. Adoption of Agenda

3.1 Adoption of Agenda

That the September 2, 2014 Committee of the Whole agenda be adopted, as circulated.

4. Petitions and Delegations

4.1 Ms. Terry June, Chair of the Duncan Housing Society Re: Request for 4 - 5 an increase to the Property Tax Exemption for Duncan Manor from 25% to 100%

4.2 Tony James, (KPL James Architecture) and Vlado Brcic (Developer) Re: 6 - 16 Rezoning and DP for 15 Canada Avenue

5. Sustainable Development

5.1 Rezoning and DP for 15 Canada Avenue 17 - 33

That the Committee direct staff to prepare the necessary Zoning Amendment Bylaw that would authorize the proposed development of a five storey mixed use commercial and residential building at 15 Canada Avenue (Lot 1, Section 17, Range 6, Quamichan District, Plan 12081), with the following conditions: 1. Property line adjustment for road dedication as shown in Schedule A-1 of Attachment B of the staff report. 2. Reconstruction of the sidewalk, curb and gutter, and related lighting and landscaping as indicated in Schedule A-1 and A-9 of Attachment B of the staff report, design to be approved by the Director of Public Works. 3. Contribution to the undergrounding of Hydro service along the Canada Avenue frontage of the proposed development. 4. Provision of a traffic analysis for the proposed Canada Avenue access. And That the Committee receive the information in the staff report related to the Development Permit Application for the proposed five storey mixed use commercial and residential building at 15 Canada Avenue. (Note: Feedback from Council is sought regarding the Development Permit Application)

City of Duncan, Committee of the Whole Meeting - September 2, 2014 Page 2 of 247 5.2 Active Transportation Plan 34 - 176

That the Committee of the Whole direct staff to forward the updated Duncan Area Active Transportation Plan to Council for approval.

6. Public Works & Engineering

6.1 Outdoor Fitness Equipment at Centennial Park Update 177 - 179

That the Committee of the Whole receive the September 2, 2014 report by the Operations Manager for information.

7. Finance and Administration

7.1 Code of Conduct Policy 180 - 203

That the following recommendation be forwarded to Council for approval:

That the Code of Conduct Policy, as attached to the September 2, 2014 report by the Director of Corporate Services, be adopted;

And That the "Workplace Harassment", "Racism", and "Personal Use of Public Works Yard Facilities, Tools & Equipment Policies" be repealed.

7.2 Permissive Tax Exemptions 204 - 215

That the following recommendations be forwarded to Council for approval:

That Council deny the additional exemption (from 25% to 100%) of 0181.0100 – 280 First Street (non-leased area) as requested by the Duncan Housing Society;

And That Council give first three readings to “Permissive Tax Exemption Bylaw 3129, 2014.”

7.3 Interim Financial Statements 216 - 242

That the Committee of the Whole receive the interim financial report for information.

7.4 Exception to Council's Kiosk Policy 243 - 245

That the Committee of the Whole authorize staff to provide an exception to the Kiosk – Portable Sales Policy for the Royal Bank (RBC) Small Business Division to have a total of four Food Truck Vendors to be present in the RBC parking lot in conjunction with October’s National Small Business Month.

8. Correspondence

8.1 West Coast Men's Support Society - Request for Letter of Support for 246 - 247 Funding Application

City of Duncan, Committee of the Whole Meeting - September 2, 2014 Page 3 of 247

9. New Business

9.1 Councillor Jackson Re: Request to Rename the Pocket Park at the Bottom of the Canada Avenue Stairs "Heiwa Park"

10. Reports, Questions and Inquiries from Members of Council (verbal)

11. Question Period from the Public

12. Adjournment

12.1 Adjourn

That the September 2, 2014 Committee of the Whole meeting be adjourned at ___.

City of Duncan, Committee of the Whole Meeting - September 2, 2014 Page 4 of 247

City of Dune n RECEIVED 200 Craig Sire I AUG 2 1 1014 Du ncan, Be v L 1W3 \ Phone: 250-74 -6126 FaX::(QO oI4

(name(s))

, c. I \~ h C. ~ ,.";1~ (j'" yrf4-..,oL , (address) 2.8 0 re quest to appear as a delegation before: o Council ,/ ,\ 0 Environment Committee [;:3/ Committee oflheWhole (0p"" , Sef-.2/N) 0 Persons With Disability Issues o Centennial Celebration Committee D Totem Committee o Olher ______Please provide a brief overview of you r presentation below, and attached a one-page (maximum) outline of your presentation. Please be specific. ( P'e ;- ...... ~ s s~ ..... t'- ---;: :-.Le--n-tp . .' ...... / ') ,-CJ.'I'''~ - 2°0Kr~f- <;;(-.;

Will you be re questing a grant or financial assistance? G}-'Yes D No Do you require audio visual equipment? 0 Yes (please specify requirement below. Audiolvisual equipment required:

(signat ure) .2 <; oJ - 7/{) - 78 {./'6 (telephone)

C0u".Cil and Committees welcome public comments, but as a courtesy to Council and+Committee I m,mbe,:rs, who deal with lengthy agendas, we request that you present your information clearly and concisely in as short a time period as possible. All presentations will be kept to a maximum of 10 minutes. If you have a large amount of printed material or information to convey, please submit it as least one week before the meeting and it will be circulated to Council and/or Committee members for their review in preparation for the If the delegation consists of more than one person, please appoint one 1 10 s oeak on ,f vou" . ======~ For Internal Use Onl ~r- .;>f;?p/~ Requestapprr~v~ed~~~~f<~~~~~~,=~ , 20~

By : _======Director of Corporate Serv===ices/CAO,,--- __ Date of Meeting

Copy: 0 Mayor 0 CAO 0 Director of Finance D Director of Public Works o Planner Page 5 of 247

RECEIVED AUG 1 8 2014 Duncan Housing Soci"-..;'b~_o--:F_ou~~.:..:.:.::AN:J 280 First Street, Duncan, Be V9L 4T3 d;Lf~ PM Phone: 748-0521 ~ e-nlail: [email protected]

Mayor & Council August 14.2014 City of Duncan 200 Craig Street Duncan, BC V9L 1W3

Your Worship & Members of Council,

Please reference our attached Permissive Tax Exemption Application dated August 14th, 2014.

We appreciate the current 25% Municipal Tax Exemption we currently have in compensation for an Evans Street Right-Ot-Way we granted to the City (in effect to and including 2016) and we appreciate the ongoing support from the City of Duncan.

Duncan Manor was constructed in 1974 and the aging building and infrastructure requires considerable replacement and upgrading. With $1,424,040 in Capital Projects confronting us, we require a long-term 100% Municipal Property Tax Exemption and other sources of revenue to meet this very significant challenge. If we are granted the requested 100% tax exemption, we pledge to use these savings solely for needed capital projects. We are in the process of researching other sources of revenue including fund raising events, an appeal for donor bequests and relevant grants.

Another future consideration that will have a profound effect on the operation of Duncan Manor is the end of our 50-year unalterable 8% fixed rate CMHC Mortgage in 2024. When the mortgage is finalized. the BC Housing Operating Agreement subsidies we annually receive will also end. Payout of our mortgage will save us approximately $9,500 per month and we will lose approximately $4,500 per month in subsidies paid by BC Housing on behalf of our low-income residents. This $5,000 per month will fall far short of our • financial needs to fund the necessary Capital Projects. These funds will also be quickly consumed by ever increasing operating costs such as wages, food costs, maintenance, utilities, ecl

Duncan, similar to other communities, has a huge aging population. Numerous seniors require affordable housing. Without Duncan Manor, our seniors would be hard pressed to find suitable affordable housing as there is no other facility like it in ttte area. Another consideration is the fact that the needs of our residents are changing w,i~h more requiring subsidies due to lower incomes. This puts Duncan Manor at risk because requirements for subsidies could change at anytime. Mayor Kent said a few short years ago that we are providing an "Essential Service" for the City of Duncan and our greater community.

I respectively request permission to address the Mayor & Council when our Permissive Tax Exemption Application is considered. Thank you.

Y:r;!: J IL~ ~ Terry June..JcJ'----- Chair Page 6 of 247 Page 7 of 247 Page 8 of 247 Page 9 of 247 Page 10 of 247 Page 11 of 247 Page 12 of 247 Page 13 of 247 Page 14 of 247 Page 15 of 247 Page 16 of 247 Page 17 of 247

Request for Decision

To: Committee of the Whole File No: RZ-2014-03 Date: September 2, 2014 From: Michelle Geneau, Planner Re: Rezoning Application for 15 Canada Avenue

RECOMMENDATION: That the Committee direct staff to prepare the necessary Zoning Amendment Bylaw that would authorize the proposed development of a five storey mixed use commercial and residential building at 15 Canada Avenue (Lot 1, Section 17, Range 6, Quamichan District, Plan 12081), with the following conditions: a. Property line adjustment for road dedication as shown in Schedule A-1 of Attachment B of the staff report. b. Reconstruction of the sidewalk, curb and gutter, and related lighting and landscaping as indicated in Schedule A-1 and A-9 of Attachment B of the staff report, design to be approved by the Director of Public Works. c. Contribution to the undergrounding of Hydro service along the Canada Avenue frontage of the proposed development. d. Provision of a traffic analysis for the proposed Canada Avenue access. And That the Committee receive the information in the staff report related the Development Permit Application for the proposed five storey mixed use commercial and residential building at 15 Canada Avenue.

BACKGROUND: As described in the August 5th Information Report by the Planner, an application has been received for a five storey mixed use development with ground floor commercial space and thirty-six (36) residential units on the upper four floors (see Attachments A and B for the Application and Schedules). The application also proposes thirty-six spaces of underground parking for the residential portion of the development, and nine surface parking spaces on the west side of the proposed development. The proposal also includes a road dedication to the City to permit sidewalk widening and the construction of a separate right turn lane at the corner of Canada Avenue with a pedestrian island. The subject site is within the Downtown Development Permit Area, in the C-1 General Commercial Zone, at the corner of Canada Avenue and Government Street. The former location of the Tzouhalem Hotel, demolished in the 1990’s, is currently surfaced with gravel and is leased monthly by the City as a combination paid/free parking area. Following the August 5th Committee of the Whole Meeting, staff met again with the applicant and their architect, to discuss the Committee’s and staff’s comments and the additional information on the development that was still required by staff. Revised drawings have been submitted, showing

Page 1 of 5 Page 18 of 247

Request for Decision – RZ-2014-03 - 15 Canada Ave. – Committee of the Whole, September 2nd, 2014

additional information including dimensions and the total land area to be dedicated as road, a rendering showing the building in context with the existing surrounding buildings, elevation drawings of each building face (including materials), an additional perspective rendering of the southwest corner, and additional details including materials and landscaping provided in the perspective renderings. Changes from the original application include:  A feature of three timber columns at the ground floor entrance at the southeast corner, with a similar column extending up the southeast corner balconies of each storey above.  The vertical siding which was previously depicted as dark grey is now shown as vertical metal siding in a light grey colour. The exterior ground floor walls along Canada Avenue and Government Street will be surfaced with stone. Other materials include hardi panel and wood siding.  Instead of a wall on the north side of the entrance to the parking ramp, there will be a 1.2 meter high metal fence, preventing pedestrians from falling onto the ramp while also providing vehicle drivers exiting the parking a full view of oncoming pedestrians and vehicles.  A line of shrubs is shown along front edge of the second storey patio along Canada Avenue, and at the rear of the parking area.  A portion of the second storey patio in the northwest corner of the development will be a common patio space for building residents, accessed by the community room. If recommended by the Committee, the proposed Zoning Bylaw Amendment will be presented at the September 15th, 2014 Council Meeting for first and second reading, and to set a date for a Public Hearing. Authorization of the related Development Permit will be brought forward to Council in conjunction with final adoption of the proposed Zoning Amendment Bylaw, once the design details are finalized.

ANALYSIS: Rezoning A Rezoning is required for the proposed development because the building will be five storeys (17 meters) high. The C-1 General Commercial Zone permits a maximum height of four storeys. The proposed development is within the 18 meter height limit of the C-1 Zone because it has a flat roof, whereas 18 meters would accommodate a pitched roof on a four storey building. Many local governments do not use number of units per hectare to determine density, and instead use a combination of floor area ratio (FAR), site coverage and setbacks to set the maximum density for development. The latter can allow a similar sized building with more units – for instance the subject application proposes 14 one bedroom units, while if more two bedroom units were proposed it would meet the current permitted density but would provide less smaller units that would be more desirable and affordable to young people or single people. Required parking is also a determining factor in residential density, but in this case the subject site is within the downtown parking exempt area. The applicant still proposes to provide parking (underground) for the residential component, and 9 surface spaces for the commercial component.

The table below compares the proposal with the current C-1 General Commercial Zoning. The applicant wishes to retain the permitted commercial uses.

Page 2 of 5 Page 19 of 247

Request for Decision – RZ-2014-03 - 15 Canada Ave. – Committee of the Whole, September 2nd, 2014

Table 1: Comparison of the proposal and existing zoning

Proposed C-1-B Proposal C-1 Zone Zone

Height (m) maximum 17 m 18 m 17 m

Storeys 5 storeys 4 storeys 5 storeys

Floor Area Ratio 2.4 : 1 3 : 1 3:1 maximum

Setbacks(m) minimum 0 m Interior lot lines: 0 m South (front) 1 m (ground floor) Ground level at street 0 m (2nd to 5th floors) frontages:

0.5 (portion of ground floor Minimum 1 m, West (int. side) 12.5 (main building) Maximum 4 m North (rear) 0 East (ext. side) 0.5 m (ground floor) 5.5 m (2nd floor)

Site coverage 69% 100% 100%

Parking 36 underground None required for this Regulated by the Off site – parking exempt Street Parking and 9 surface area Loading Bylaw

Density 195 units per hectare 150 units per hectare 150 units per hectare 200 units per hectare 1 parking space per residential unit is provided in an underground parking structure.

In conjunction with the Rezoning, the applicant has included landscape plans including the sidewalk reconstruction (Schedule A-9 of Attachment B). The plans indicate new lamp standards and street trees. Staff have requested that the plans be updated to also show installation of linear planters along the curb edge between the trees and lamps, to create a buffer between the street and the sidewalk. Staff are currently in the process of acquiring quotes for the study and engineering design work for construction of a new right turn lane from Canada Avenue to Government Street.

Development Permit Area Guidelines Along Canada Avenue the second to fifth storeys will be set back 4.5 meters from the ground floor, creating a large patio area which will contain a glass railing and a row of shrubs along the entire edge.

Page 3 of 5 Page 20 of 247

Request for Decision – RZ-2014-03 - 15 Canada Ave. – Committee of the Whole, September 2nd, 2014

The drawings (Attachment B) do not show any major revisions to the design of the south (Government Street) side of the development. The proposal shows a 2.2 meter shift of the property line along Government Street to permit expansion of the sidewalk to 3 meters. The ground floor of the development will be set back an additional 1 meter, however the second to fifth storeys will extend almost to the new property line, with the exception of the corner units of the fifth storey. The applicant has been informed that the proposal for the south side does not meet the Downtown Development Permit Area Guidelines of build-to lines of 2 to 2.5 meters and setting back the fourth storey to reduce the visual impact of upper storeys. The applicant is concerned that altering the design could reduce the viability of his project by reducing the number of potential units. Other than the setback of the upper floors, the design is mostly consistent with Development Permit Area Guidelines. These include creating large pedestrian ‘plazas’ on corners, applying high quality architectural design, use of natural finishing materials, widening sidewalks, and creating appealing street frontages. A portion of the design for ground floor on the west side, adjacent to the surface parking area may still be updated to include different materials or finishes, as the design currently shows a somewhat featureless wall.

Sustainability The applicant submitted a combined Sustainability Checklist for the Development Permit and Rezoning applications. The proposal scored highest under Priority 1 (key areas: energy and GHG emissions, waste reduction, and transportation and mobility) and Priority 2 (key areas: community and individual health, education, and recreation and leisure). The application did not meet the targets for Priority 3 (key areas: aquatic and terrestrial natural systems, food and agriculture) and Priority 4 (key areas: buildings and sites, economy and employment, and arts and culture), although the application did meet the target under rezoning for Priority 4. Many of the points under the Buildings and Sites category of the Sustainability Checklist are based on the provision of rental, accessible and affordable housing. The proposed development is for market residential units, and it is unknown at this point whether the strata for this development will allow rentals. However, points gained in this category included reuse of a vacant parcel of land, and achieving green building certification through features such as power smart systems and recycled construction materials. The mix of one bedroom units and varied sizes of two bedroom units will enable a range of pricing options. Other items of note are that the development will employ a stormwater management strategy, utilizing a bioswale along the western property line adjacent to the surface parking spaces along with an underground detention tank. The proposed development will add 36 residential units to the downtown area, encouraging walkability, and will be built on a highly visible lot that has been vacant for over twenty years. The proposed development includes an active street frontage with clear pedestrian routes which will enhance this street corner. The applicant is an experienced developer who has indicated he will aim to incorporate sustainability principles wherever economically feasible.

Reason for Recommendation The proposed development meets the policies of the OCP and Integrated Community Sustainability Plan overall, redeveloping a key corner which can be considered a gateway to downtown Duncan, and introducing additional housing in the downtown. The applicant has been cooperative with the City’s request of a road dedication, sidewalk improvements and contribution to undergrounding services along the Canada Avenue frontage.

Page 4 of 5 Page 21 of 247

Request for Decision – RZ-2014-03 - 15 Canada Ave. – Committee of the Whole, September 2nd, 2014

IMPLICATIONS: Financial: The City will receive some Development Cost Charges for the proposed development. The proposed underground of services along Canada Avenue will cost approximately $300,000 and the City is applying for a BC Hydro Beautification Grant – the costs will be split three ways by the City, developer and BC Hydro. Costs have not yet been determined for the construction of the right turn lane from Canada Avenue, but the project could potentially proceed along with City infrastructure upgrades proposed for Canada Avenue in 2015. Policy: If the Committee recommends that the proposed Zoning Amendment be prepared, Public Notice will be given in accordance with the Local Government Act and Development Approvals Procedure Bylaw No. 1901, 2000. Strategic Priorities: The proposed development relates to Priority 8: Encourage a thriving Downtown. Sustainability: See the Sustainability Checklist section.

ALTERNATE RECOMMENDATIONS: 1. That the Committee direct staff not to prepare the necessary Zoning Amendment Bylaw that would authorize the proposed development of a five storey mixed use commercial and residential building at 15 Canada Avenue (Lot 1, Section 17, Range 6, Quamichan District, Plan 12081). 2. That the Committee direct staff to prepare the necessary Zoning Amendment Bylaw that would authorize the proposed development of a five storey mixed use commercial and residential building at 15 Canada Avenue (Lot 1, Section 17, Range 6, Quamichan District, Plan 12081), with recommended changes to the proposal and conditions.

ATTACHMENTS:

Attachment A: Application & Sustainability Checklist Attachment B: Schedules Attachment C: Information Report – Committee of the Whole Meeting, August 5, 2014

Respectfully submitted,

Michelle Geneau, Planner Reviewed by CAO

Page 5 of 5 519 PANDORA AVENUE, VICTORIA, B.C. TEL: 250-388-4261 FAX: 250-388-9771 41717 469 SETBACK

1 2 3 456 7 8 9 H/C SITE AREA EXISTING: 2068 M2 22260 SQ FT BIKE PARKING PROPOSED: 1849 M2 19903 SQ FT DIFFERENCE: 219 M2 2357 SQ FT

OUTDOOR BUILDING FOOTPRINT: 1280 M2 13779 SQ FT. PARKING AREA SITE COVERAGE: 69%

FLOOR SPACE RATIO: 2.4:1

BUILDING HEIGHT: 17M 55.8 FT. 5 STOREYS

PROPOSED PROPERTY LINE 27103

57 EXISTING SETBACK PROPERTY LINE 38353

ROOF

NO: DATE: ISSUE:

STREET PROJECT TITLE:

Dakova Square

12382 15 Canada Ave. Duncan, BC GOVERNMENT SEAL:

445

SETBACK

18587

DRAWING TITLE: 12207 11031 7856 Site Plan CANADA AVENUE

KPLJ JOB #: 1425 .vwx DRAWN:

v2014 CHECKED: SCALE: 1:100

14-08-15 PRINT DATE: 2014-08-15

DRAWING #: 1425_Duncan

A1.00 name: File SCHEDULE A-1 RZ-2014-03 15 CANADA AVE PROPOSED SITE PLAN Page 22of247 519 PANDORA AVENUE, VICTORIA, B.C. TEL: 250-388-4261 FAX: 250-388-9771

STORAGE LOCKERS (12)

123 456 7 8 9 10 11 12

O/H DOOR

ELEV.

13 UP 14 15 16 17 18 19

LOBBY

RAMP UP VESTIBULE

NO: DATE: ISSUE:

PROJECT TITLE:

Dakova Square 15 Canada Ave. Duncan, BC

SEAL:

VEST.

29 26 27 28 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 STORAGE LOCKERS

DRAWING TITLE:

STORAGE LOCKERS (10) Parkade Plan

KPLJ JOB #: 1425 .vwx DRAWN:

v2014 CHECKED: SCALE: 1:100

14-08-15 PRINT DATE: 2014-08-15

DRAWING #: 1425_Duncan

A1.01 name: File SCHEDULE A-2 RZ-2014-03 15 CANADA AVE PROPOSED PARKADE PLAN Page 23of247 519 PANDORA AVENUE, VICTORIA, B.C. TEL: 250-388-4261 FAX: 250-388-9771

LINE OF LINE OF LINE OF BALCONY ABOVE BALCONY ABOVE BALCONY ABOVE

LINE OF BUILDING ABOVE

ELEV. LOBBY

UP DN LINE OF CANOPY ABOVE

MAIL VEST.

RETAIL 10,581 SQ FT 983 M2 NO: DATE: ISSUE:

PROJECT TITLE:

Dakova Square 15 Canada Ave. RAMP DOWN Duncan, BC 12%

DN UP

SEAL: LINE OF BUILDING ABOVE

LINE OF BUILDING ABOVE

LINE OF BALCONY ABOVE RAMP DOWN LINE OF CANOPY 2% DRAWING TITLE: ABOVE

Main Floor Plan

KPLJ JOB #: 1425 LINE OF CANOPY .vwx ABOVE DRAWN:

v2014 CHECKED: SCALE: 1:100

14-08-15 PRINT DATE: 2014-08-15

DRAWING #: 1425_Duncan

A1.02 name: File SCHEDULE A-3 RZ-2014-03 15 CANADA AVE PROPOSED MAIN FLOOR PLAN Page 24of247 519 PANDORA AVENUE, VICTORIA, B.C. TEL: 250-388-4261 FAX: 250-388-9771

SCREEN ROOF DECK

BALCONY ABOVE BALCONY BALCONY BALCONY SCREEN

ELEV.

COMMON AREA

HWT DN HWT HWT W/D UP W/D W/D

ROOF HWT

W/D

HWT HWT HWT HWT HWT W/D

W/D NO: DATE: ISSUE:

W/D W/D W/D W/D UP DN PROJECT TITLE:

HWT Dakova Square

SCREEN 15 Canada Ave. Duncan, BC

SEAL:

BALCONY

BALCONY ABOVE

ROOF/DECK PLANTER

DRAWING TITLE:

2nd Floor Plan (Typical)

KPLJ JOB #: 1425 .vwx DRAWN:

v2014 CHECKED: SCALE: 1:100

14-08-15 PRINT DATE: 2014-08-15

DRAWING #: 1425_Duncan

A1.03 name: File SCHEDULE A-4 RZ-2014-03 15 CANADA AVE PROPOSED 2ND FLOOR PLAN Page 25of247 519 PANDORA AVENUE, VICTORIA, B.C. TEL: 250-388-4261 FAX: 250-388-9771

BALCONY BALCONY

ELEV. BALCONY BALCONY

DN NO: DATE: ISSUE: PROJECT TITLE:

Dakova Square 15 Canada Ave.

BALCONY Duncan, BC

BALCONY

SEAL:

BALCONY BALCONY BALCONY

DRAWING TITLE:

5th Floor Plan

KPLJ JOB #: 1425 .vwx DRAWN:

v2014 CHECKED: SCALE: 1:100

14-08-15 PRINT DATE: 2014-08-15

DRAWING #: 1425_Duncan

A1.06 name: File SCHEDULE A-5 RZ-2014-03 15 CANADA AVE PROPOSED 5TH FLOOR PLAN Page 26of247 519 PANDORA AVENUE, VICTORIA, B.C. TEL: 250-388-4261 FAX: 250-388-9771

13.5M 3000

10.5M

3000 LEGEND 7.5M 1 ROCK 2 VERTICAL METAL SIDING 3 HORIZONTAL WOOD SIDING

3000 4 HARDI PANEL 4.5M 5 GLAZING 6 HEAVY TIMBER COLUMN 4500

EAST ELEVATION 6 2 3 1 4 2 5 3 1 2 4 2 3 4

13.5M NO: DATE: ISSUE:

PROJECT TITLE:

3000 Dakova Square 10.5M 15 Canada Ave. Duncan, BC 3000

7.5M SEAL: 3000

4.5M 4500

DRAWING TITLE:

Elevations

KPLJ JOB #: 1425 .vwx DRAWN:

v2014 CHECKED: SCALE: 1:100

14-08-15 PRINT DATE: 2014-08-15

SOUTH ELEVATION DRAWING #: 4 3 5 4 1 2 3 5 6 1425_Duncan

A2.01 name: File SCHEDULE A-6 RZ-2014-03 15 CANADA AVE EAST AND SOUTH ELEVATIONS Page 27of247 519 PANDORA AVENUE, VICTORIA, B.C. TEL: 250-388-4261 FAX: 250-388-9771

13.5M 3000

10.5M 3000

7.5M 3000

4.5M 4500

WEST ELEVATION 2 4 3 3 4 2 5 3 6

13.5M NO: DATE: ISSUE:

PROJECT TITLE:

3000 Dakova Square 10.5M 15 Canada Ave. Duncan, BC 3000

7.5M SEAL: 3000

4.5M 4500

DRAWING TITLE:

Elevations

KPLJ JOB #: 1425 .vwx DRAWN:

v2014 CHECKED: SCALE: 1:100

14-08-15 PRINT DATE: 2014-08-15 NORTH ELEVATION 1 4 2 DRAWING #: 1425_Duncan

A2.02 name: File SCHEDULE A-7 RZ-2014-03 15 CANADA AVE WEST AND NORTH ELEVATIONS Page 28of247 519 PANDORA AVENUE, VICTORIA, B.C. V8W 1N5

250-388-4261

VIEW FROM SOUTHEAST

No. Description Date

Dakova Square 15 Canada Ave. Duncan, BC

SEAL:

DRAWING TITLE:

Renderings

PROJECT NUMBER: 1425 DRAWN BY: . CHECKED BY: .

SCALE: NOT TO SCALE DATE 2014-08-15 A2.04 VIEW FROM SOUTHWEST

SCHEDULE A-8 RZ-2014-03 15 CANADA AVE RENDERINGS Page 29of247 SCHEDULE A-9 RZ-2014-03 15 CANADA AVE PROPOSED LANDSCAPE PLAN Page 30of247 Drawing List: Cover Sheet A1.00 Site Plan / Roof Plan A1.01 Parkade Plan A1 .02 Main Floor Plan DAKOVA SQUARE A1.03 Typical Floor Plan A1.04 5th Floor Plan SCHEDULE A-10 A2.01 Elevations A2.02 Elevations RZ-2014-14-03 CANADA AVE 15 Canada Avenue, Duncan, BC A2.03 Renderings SOUTHEAST RENDERING Page 31of247 Page 32 of 247

Information Only Report

To: Committee of the Whole File No: DP-2014-14 & RZ-2014-03 Date: August 5th, 2014 From: Michelle Geneau, Planner Re: Applications for Development Permit No. DP-2014-14 and Rezoning No. RZ-2014- 03 – 15 Canada Avenue – Mixed Use Development

RECOMMENDATION: That the Committee receive the Information Report from the Planner on the applications for Development Permit No. 2014-14 and Rezoning No. RZ-2014-03, for a mixed use development at 15 Canada Avenue, for information.

BACKGROUND: Staff have received applications for a Rezoning and Development Permit to authorize the development of a five storey building with one level of underground parking, ground floor commercial space and thirty-six residential units at 15 Canada Avenue. Nine surface parking spaces on the west side of the property are also proposed. The application is currently being reviewed internally by staff and has been referred to utility providers. Further details on the site design are also required from the developer prior to considering the application as complete and proceeding with the Council approval process, (e.g. elevation drawings and measurements have not yet been provided). However, the information received to date is attached to this report as Attachments A and B. The site is located at the northwest corner of Canada Avenue and Government Street, the former location of the Tzouhalem Hotel. Currently the gravel-surfaced area is leased monthly by the City as a combination paid/free parking area. The site previously received approval of a Development Permit for a mixed use development with thirty residential units in 2008, which was not constructed. In 2011 a Development Variance Permit was authorized to permit live/work units on the ground floor of a different proposed mixed use commercial and residential building which also did not proceed. The current application includes a road dedication for sidewalk expansion and the construction of a designated right turn lane eastbound onto Government Street from Canada Avenue. This was based on a preliminary design for a right turn lane with a pedestrian island which was incorporated into the 2011 Development Variance Permit. Staff will commission detailed design work for the lane addition by an engineering consultant. Site development issues that staff will be discussing with the applicant include (but are not limited to): undergrounding utilities along the Canada Avenue frontage, potential sightline issues affecting pedestrians and vehicles, storm water management, and ensuring that the construction process is not disruptive to pedestrians, traffic and neighbouring businesses.

Page 1 of 2 Page 33 of 247

Information Report – DP-2014-14 & RZ-2014-03 15 Canada Ave – Committee of the Whole, August 5, 2014

A Rezoning is required because the proposed building is five storeys high. The C-1 General Commercial Zone only permits a maximum of four storeys. Density can not be varied through a Development Variance Permit, and varying the permitted height can be considered to vary the density of a site by permitting an additional storey of residential units. As a Zone does not currently exist that would permit general commercial uses as well as a five storey high-density residential building, with setbacks and site coverage similar to the proposed development, staff will need to develop a new zone for consideration by Council. Public notice and a Public Hearing will be required for the Rezoning. Staff have requested massing drawings showing the proposed building in relation to the existing surrounding buildings, and additional perspective and elevation drawings other than the drawing showing the proposed south, and a calculation of the new density with the road dedication.

Specific items of note for possible Committee of the Whole discussion: 1. Staff will be expressing concern that the development as currently proposed does not meet the Downtown design guidelines on the Government Street frontage with respect to stepping back the building on the upper floors (e.g. 4th and 5th).

2. In meetings with the applicant, the desire for an onsite condo sales trailer was mentioned. The Zoning Bylaw Section 4.4(a) states that “a use located in whole or in part: in a mobile home, tent or trailer” is prohibited in all zones. Staff suggested using a nearby commercial storefront as a sales centre, however Council may, through a Temporary Use Permit, allow a temporary sales trailer on site or on an adjacent site. 3. The addition of a right turn lane on Canada Avenue. 4. Undergrounding utilities in the Downtown.

ATTACHMENTS:

Attachment A: Application and Sustainability Checklist Attachment B: Drawings

Respectfully submitted,

Michelle Geneau, Planner Reviewed by CAO

Page 2 of 2 Page 34 of 247

Request for Decision

Date: September 2nd, 2014 To: Committee of the Whole From: Jordan Ruegg, Student Planner Re: Duncan Area Active Transportation Plan

RECOMMENDATION: That the Committee of the Whole direct staff to forward the updated Duncan Area Active Transportation Plan to Council for approval.

BACKGROUND: The Duncan Area Active Transportation Plan (ATP) is the result of a comprehensive planning effort between the City, the Municipality of North Cowichan and the Cowichan Tribes, to promote walking, cycling and other modes of self-propelled transportation in the region. The ATP’s vision is to provide safe, convenient and comfortable active transportation choices and facilities, to promote the movement of people and goods. The Plan will also promote livability and sustainability within the region by maximizing transportation choice and minimizing the environmental impacts of transportation. A number of specific policy goals have been identified as key components of the ATP. Increasing safety for cyclists and pedestrians, providing a range of walking and bicycling facilities for people of all ages and abilities, increasing the mode share of active transportation trips, encouraging cooperation and coordination between government agencies and raising awareness of active transportation within the community are some of the main goals of the Plan. The development of the ATP, with Alta Planning and Design and Bunt Engineering as consultants, began in the summer of 2011. It was a collaborative process involving residents and stakeholders from all three jurisdictions (stakeholders included CVRD staff). Feedback was received through information booths at the Duncan Farmers Market, an online survey and at several public meetings and open houses. One informative event was a September 2013 workshop with members of Cycle Cowichan. The resulting feedback was analyzed and incorporated into the projects and policies that make up the Plan. The proposed projects were prioritized as short-term (1-5 years), medium-term (5-10 years) and long-term (10-20 years), depending on a number a factors. Most recently, a Public Open House was held on June 12 and 13, 2014, presenting the final draft of the ATP for feedback. Approximately forty people attended the Open House at the Cowichan Aquatic Centre over the two days. Attendees mostly provided input on the main facility improvements they viewed as priorities (see Attachment). In addition to the public involvement in the process, a review of existing infrastructure and existing plans and policies was also conducted to assess the existing policy and infrastructure framework. This review helped Staff determine deficiencies in the active transportation network and in policies that guide transportation planning decision-making.

Page 1 of 3 Page 35 of 247

Request for Decision – Active Transportation Plan – September 2nd, 2014 Committee of the Whole

The recommendations in the ATP are congruent and complementary to the policies and projects proposed in the University Village Local Area Plan and the Trans Canada Highway Corridor Management Plan, to ensure a consistent planning framework and avoid ambiguity between plans*.

* The facility recommendation maps, Maps 12 and 13 are currently being updated by North Cowichan staff to reflect the other two plans, therefore the versions attached with this report contain notes of the changes that will be made.

ANALYSIS: The ATP is focused on improvements to active transportation in 3 separate, but connected areas: policies, programs and infrastructure improvements. A number of policies are recommended for review and adoption based on establishing a “transportation hierarchy” that gives priority to pedestrians and cyclists. These policies are geared towards creating complete streets, providing end-of-trip facilities for bicycles and emphasizing the importance of transit connections.

The ATP also recommends a series of programs that should be implemented to support the objectives of the Plan. These programs include educational programs highlighting the benefits of active transportation modes, enforcement programs that help provide safer streets for pedestrians and cyclists, and evaluation programs such as creating an Active Transportation Committee to evaluate the success of ATP policies and to enable coordination of the implementation.

The ATP also provides a recommended facility improvement plan to provide the necessary infrastructure improvements to achieve the Plan’s goals. There are several projects that are highlighted under the Plan including widening sidewalks, constructing bike lanes, improving pedestrian crossings and creating new connections between neighbourhoods. These infrastructure improvements have been ranked in terms of priority. Along with the ATP is a separate Design Guideline document which establishes a bikeway facility continuum for different street types, and contains recommended standards for cyclist and pedestrian facilities. The Design Guidelines are somewhat abbreviated in the amount of detail provided for each guildeline, but reference the Capital Regional District Pedestrian and Cycling Master Plan and other transportation standard documents that the City can refer to.

The ATP provides an opportunity for the City to develop a more effective and efficient active transportation system by working with the Municipality of North Cowichan and the Cowichan Tribes to identify common problems and to produce consistent policies among the separate jurisdictions.

IMPLICATIONS: Financial: Adoption of the infrastructure projects contained in the Duncan Area Active Transportation Plan may incur significant capital expenditures for the City. However, adoption of the Plan will make the City eligible for grants that it would not be able to access otherwise. Policy: The ATP policies are consistent with the TCH Corridor Management Plan, University Village Local Area Plan, and other City policies. Strategic Priorities The ATP addresses TCH traffic circulation and safety issues and

Page 2 of 3 Page 36 of 247

Request for Decision – Active Transportation Plan – September 2nd, 2014 Committee of the Whole

transportation network improvements as identified by the Strategic Plan.

Sustainability: The ATP supports the City’s Integrated Community Sustainability Plan by promoting a healthy and active community through active transportation choices.

ALTERNATE RECOMMENDATIONS: a) That the Committee of the Whole direct Staff not to forward the updated Duncan Area Active Transportation Plan to Council for approval. b) That the Committee of the Whole direct Staff to forward the updated Duncan Area Active Transportation Plan to Council for approval, with recommended changes to the Plan.

ATTACHMENTS: Attachment A: Duncan Area Active Transportation Plan Information Handout Attachment B: Duncan Area Active Transportation Plan Attachment C: Duncan Area Active Transportation Plan Design Guidelines Attachment D: June 2014 Open House and Survey Summary

Respectfully submitted,

Prepared by Jordan Ruegg, Student Planner

Reviewed by Michelle Geneau, Planner Reviewed by CAO

Page 3 of 3 Page 37 of 247

DUNCAN AREA ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION PLAN

WHAT ARE THE GOALS OF THE PLAN? PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT DEVELOPING OUR PROCESS THE PLAN Farmers Market, a Residents User Assessment Needs Infrastructure Review of Existing online publicsurvey Review ofActive Transportation Jurisdictional Policies Open Streets Review ofLocal Transportation Programs Active Identification of opportunities & constraints Transportation Drafted Active Plan Page 38of247 Page 39 of 247

RECOMMENDATIONS OBJECTIVES: SAFETY, CONNECTIVITY & USER EXPERIENCE

WRITING NEW POLICIES

BB CC

BE BFE CHC BB

CREATING NEW PROGRAMS 2

ENCOURAGEMENT & EVALUATION/ ENFORCEMENT EDUCATION INSTITUTIONAL Skills Training RCMP Safe Routes to School Enforcement Page 40 of 247

INCREASED SIDEWALK WIDTH

WAYFINDING BICYCLE LANES SIGNAGE

INFRASTRUCTURE 3 IMPROVEMENTS TRAILS ACCESSIBILITY IMPROVEMENTS BICYCLE DETECTION AT INTERSECTIONS Safety Improvements ` 7# G77 %L7 ENHANCED Community Support LIGHTING TRANS-CANADA (`) HWY PHASED IMPLEMENTATION DESIGN GUIDELINES

GET INVOLVED MORE INFO?

Visit our Website for view the Plan & Updates: Visit www.duncan.ca N Search for City Initiatives

To comment on the Plan, send your feedback to: F E MORE INFO?

Visit www.duncan.ca | Search for City Initiatives Page 41 of 247

Duncan Area Active Transportation Plan

April, 2014 Page 42 of 247

Elected officials, staff and the residents of Duncan, North Cowichan and Cowichan Tribes, Cowichan Valley Regional District and Ministry of Transportation and Infrastructure all played key roles in developing this plan. Page 43 of 247

Active transportation includes walking, cycling, and any other self-propelled method of getting around and includes the use of mobility devices and accessing public transit. The purpose of the Duncan Area Active Transportation Plan (ATP) is to: 1. Identify benefits of active transportation (AT). 2. Improve safety and community connectivity for pedestrians and cyclists. 3. Support plans and policies for the reduction of green house gas (GHG) emissions. 4. Guide the development of well designed and integrated walking and cycling infrastructure. 5. Identify a framework of programs and policies to ensure that residents and visitors have safe access to a variety of travel options, depending on their needs, within the study area. 6. Provide an implementation strategy.

The Duncan Area ATP is the result of a comprehensive planning effort for Cowichan Tribes, the City of Duncan, and the Municipality of North Cowichan. The project undertook a number of steps: 1. Information was sought from residents to determine user needs and comments about existing walking and biking options, in particular about how often they walk or cycle, perception of safety, and what they liked and did not like about walking and cycling in the study area. The information was gathered in a number of ways, including an on-line survey, a stall at the Duncan Farmer’s Market with questionnaires and the use of maps to identify likes and concerns, and meeting with user groups. 2. The consulting team (the Team) collected data on existing infrastructure during the summer and fall of 2011, then analyzed the information with respect to safety, connectivity, completeness, destinations, barriers, constraints and user experience. 3. The Team reviewed and assessed the policy documents of each jurisdiction and related jurisdictions such as the Cowichan Valley Regional District (CVRD), with respect to transportation goals and level of support for AT. 4. The Team reviewed the existing local programs available to support pedestrians and cyclists. 5. The Team interviewed staff of each jurisdiction to determine policy, program, and jurisdictional opportunities and constraints. 6. The plan makes recommendations based on the above information gathering, analysis, and by giving consideration to a transportation hierarchy that utilizes “complete street” principles. Page 44 of 247

"Self-propelled" active transportation policies provide a number of benefits to individuals. It provides anyone from the very young to the very old quality mobility options. It supports residents that live in the area and visitors to the area that are looking for a more physically active and economic experience to improve their health and well-being. System wide, strong active transportation policies provide greater equity in the provision of transportation and helps reduce harmful emissions thereby improving air quality and support climate action planning. The Plan provides the municipalities with a recommended approach including improvements that take place in the form of policy, programming and physical design and implementation. The objectives of the recommendations are prioritized as follows: 1. Safety improvements

Safety improvements support the needs of all age groups, those with few mobility options due to physical or financial constraints, and those who choose to travel by walking or cycling for most trips. 2. Connectivity improvements Connectivity improvements support the same groups as safety improvements but also enhance the experience of recreational users (residents and visitors) by tying the cycling and walking infrastructure to trails and other destinations. 3. User experience improvements Giving consideration to the improvement of the experience of walking and cycling will increase resident and visitor support and the use of pedestrian and cycling infrastructure. The result is intended to further enhance the livability for residents, the visitor experience, and the general character of the study area.

The ATP consists of recommended policy for review and adoption by each jurisdiction. The policy is based on a transportation hierarchy that gives priority to pedestrians and cyclists and the principles of “Complete Streets”. The ATP provides a list of potential programs that the partner jurisdictions or other agencies (such as the School District, seniors groups, or cycling groups) could consider for implementation to support the objectives of safety, connectivity and improved experience. The programs are related to outreach, bicycle skills training, the use of the web to access information, developing safe routes to school, walking opportunities to increase social interaction as well as improving health, and enforcement related issues. The ATP provides recommendations with respect to the monitoring, evaluation and achievement of the objectives of the Plan. These include forming multi-jurisdictional committees intended to address barriers to obtaining the objectives of the plan and to support design, policy and programs wherever possible for each jurisdiction to, obtain as much consistency as possible in approach and product. Included are Design Guidelines that support obtaining the objectives of the Plan. These guidelines are meant to address and give priority to the needs of pedestrians and cyclists, while recognizing the reality of motorized travel for a variety of purposes. Page 45 of 247

Finally, the ATP provides a recommended facility improvement plan to address short-term pedestrian and cycling network improvements and identifies potential funding sources. The recommended initial network improvements are prioritized on the basis of providing: Safety Improvements Ease of Implementation Active and Safe Routes to School Community Support Access to Community Destinations Local / Regional Connectivity Suitable Roadway Types

The ATP represents the efforts of elected officials, many dedicated community members, and staff members from several governing jurisdictions. There is a significant amount of data and consideration given to improving the quality of the pedestrian and cycling experience. The data is a snapshot of the general condition of active transportation in the study area in a limited time frame. The ATP is the result of a multi-jurisdictional interest that recognizes that residents and visitors do not see or interact with the boundaries of each jurisdiction but with the overall built environment. Each jurisdiction has a number of common goals – the primary goal is to address the safety and comfort of their residents and those who visit the area. This Plan is intended to support those goals with a particular focus on active transportation.

Page 46 of 247

Acknowledgments ...... 1 Executive Summary ...... 2 Table of Contents 1. Introduction ...... 1-1 1.1 Building the Case for Walking and Biking ...... 1-1 1.2 Study Area ...... 1-2 1.3 Goals of the Plan ...... 1-3 1.4 Public Involvement ...... 1-3 2. Existing Conditions ...... 2-4 2.1 Existing Program and Policy Framework ...... 2-4

2.1.1 ...... Policy Review ...... 2-4

2.1.2 ...... Program Review ...... 2-5 2.2 Existing Infrastructure ...... 2-7

2.2.1 ...... Pedestrian Network ...... 2-7

2.2.2 ...... Bicycle Network ...... 2-11

2.2.3 ...... Jurisdictional Approach and Active Transportation Planning - Overview 2-14

2.2.4 ...... Enforcement ...... 2-17 2.3 Plan Summary ...... 2-18 3. User Needs and Infrastructure Assessment ...... 3-19 3.1 Public Involvement Analysis ...... 3-19

3.1.1 ...... Public Involvement Plan ...... 3-19

3.1.2 ...... Initial Public Input ...... 3-20

3.1.3 ...... Walking Analysis ...... 3-21

3.1.4 ...... Cycling Analysis ...... 3-23

3.1.5 ...... Cycle Cowichan Brainstorming Meeting ...... 3-27 3.2 Analysis of Existing Infrastructure ...... 3-28

3.2.1 ...... Safety ...... 3-29

3.2.2 ...... Connectivity and Completeness, Barriers and Constraints ...... 3-31

3.2.3 ...... Analysis of Pedestrian Gaps ...... 3-32 Page 47 of 247

3.2.4 ...... Analysis of Bicycling Network ...... 3-33

3.2.5 ...... Service of Key Destinations ...... 3-34

3.2.6 ...... User Experience ...... 3-36

3.2.7 ...... Summary of Network Evaluation ...... 3-37 4. Recommendations and Implementation ...... 4-38 4.1 Policy Recommendations ...... 4-38

4.1.1 ...... Transportation Hierarchy...... 4-38

4.1.2 ...... Complete Streets ...... 4-38

4.1.3 ...... Sample Complete Streets Policy Language ...... 4-39

4.1.4 ...... End of Trip Facilities for Bicyclists ...... 4-43

4.1.5 ...... Sample Bicycle Parking Policy Language ...... 4-43

4.1.6 ...... Emphasizing Transit Connections ...... 4-46 4.2 Program Recommendations ...... 4-47 Encouragement and Education ...... 4-47

4.2.1 ...... Farmer’s Market Outreach ...... 4-47

4.2.2 ...... Bicycle Skills Training ...... 4-47

4.2.3 ...... Comprehensive Communication ...... 4-48

4.2.4 ...... Active and Safe Routes to Schools (ASRTS) ...... 4-48

4.2.5 ...... Senior Strolls Walking Program and Safety Education ...... 4-49 Enforcement ...... 4-49

4.2.6 ...... Creating Strong Relationships between the RCMP, Public Works, Cycling/Walking Community, and Community Policing ...... 4-49

4.2.7 ...... Speeding Enforcement ...... 4-51

4.2.8 ...... Crosswalk Enforcement Action ...... 4-51 Evaluation/Institutional ...... 4-52

4.2.9 ...... Convene an Active Transportation Committee ...... 4-52 4.3 Additional Programmatic Recommendations ...... 4-53

4.3.1 ...... Share Training or Expertise ...... 4-53

4.3.2 ...... Develop Shared Methodologies and Priorities for Project Funding and Development ...... 4-53

4.3.3 ...... Formalize Annual Review of Performance Measures ...... 4-53 Page 48 of 247

4.4 Infrastructure Recommendations ...... 4-53

4.4.1 ...... Citywide Recommendations ...... 4-54 4.5 Implementation of Infrastructure Recommendations ...... 4-56

4.5.1 ...... Recommended Project Prioritization ...... 4-56

4.5.2 ...... Recommended Short-Term Area Wide Improvements ...... 4-58

4.5.3 ...... Short Term Pedestrian Network Improvements...... 4-58

4.5.4 ...... Short Term Bicycle Network Improvements ...... 4-58 4.6 Explore Potential Funding Sources ...... 4-64

4.6.1 ...... Municipal Government...... 4-64

4.6.2 ...... Senior Government Funding Sources 4-65

Maps Map 1. Active Transportation Plan Study Area……………………………………………………….…1-2 Map 2. Plan Area Street Functional Classifications……………………………………………….…4-69 Map 3. Bike Parking Inventory for Downtown Duncan…………...……………………….……..2-13 Map 4. Plan Area Existing Pedestrian Facilities………………………………………………….…….4-69 Map 5. Plan Area Existing Bicycle Facilities…………………………………………………………….…4-73 Map 6. Exemplary and Problematic Active Transportation Locations – Walking – Comments Received at Farmer’s Market Summer 2011………………………4-75 Map 7. Exemplary and Problematic Active Transportation Locations – Biking – Comments Received at Farmer’s Market Summer 2011……………..…………..4-77 Map 8. Gap Analysis – Walking……………………………………………………………………………………4-79 Map 9. Gap Analysis – Bicycling…………………………………………………………………………………..4-81 Map 10. User Experience – Walking……………………………………………………………………………4-83 Map 11. User Experience – Bicycling………………………………………………………………………….4-85 Map 12. Plan Area Pedestrian Facility Improvements……………………………………………...4-87 Map 13. Plan Area Bikeway Facility Improvements and Phasing…………………………..4-89

Page 49 of 247

This page intentionally left blank.

Page 50 of 247

Active transport includes walking, cycling, and any other self-propelled mode. The purpose of the Duncan Area Active Transportation Plan (ATP) is to guide the development of walking and cycling infrastructure and to identify a framework of programs and policies designed to encourage residents and visitors of the Cowichan Valley to use these modes. The Plan was prepared under the direction of a Stakeholder Advisory Committee (SAC) that includes representatives from the City of Duncan, the Cowichan Tribes, the Municipality of North Cowichan, and the Cowichan Valley Regional District (CVRD). This Plan is the result of a comprehensive planning effort by Cowichan Tribes, Duncan, and North Cowichan. This Plan recommends that roadway design focus on serving the most vulnerable roadway users (pedestrians and bicyclists) and support transportation alternatives, (e.g., transit), which will result in a transportation system that meets the needs of all users. Recommending bicycling and pedestrian improvements in a comprehensive and Figure 1. Transportation planning systematic manner can create a more cohesive and hierarchy that meets the needs of all roadway users legible transportation system. Working with a unified set of design guides and policy directives also provides a clear picture for planners, decision makers, and residents. Multi-jurisdictional planning can result in strengthened municipal partnerships, efficient resource utilization, and increased opportunities to transform the Duncan area into an increasingly pleasant place to walk and bike.

Walking and bicycling are gaining new interest from communities across Canada after decades of neglect when most attention focused on motor vehicle transportation. As fuel prices rise, making short trips by bicycling and walking instead of by car makes sense. However, due to existing low levels of use and funding, walking and bicycling face an uphill battle to prove their utility as viable, efficient modes of transportation. Many of walking and bicycling’s greatest strengths – such as creating attractive, livable streetscapes and increasing community health through exercise – are not accounted for when evaluating transportation projects. Similarly, many of the external social costs of driving, such as traffic congestion, crashes, and climate change from greenhouse gas emissions, are not sufficiently weighted. The benefits created by walking and bicycling increase with use. For each additional mile traveled by walking or bicycling instead of driving, about one pound of greenhouse gas emissions are prevented, a few less cents are spent on gas, and a person gets a few minutes closer to reaching their recommended healthy levels of physical activity for the week. When walking and bicycling become part of people’s daily activity, these benefits add up to create a healthier, more affordable community. Page 51 of 247

The study area is shown in light gray on Map 1 (below). The ATP focuses on the urbanized activity centres in Duncan, the Cowichan Tribes’ Urbanized Area, and portions of North Cowichan’s ‘South End” growth centre. Other active transportation connections - to activity centres in other parts of the Cowichan Valley - were also considered in the Plan, but in far less detail. The ATP also focuses on priority corridors (shown in orange), which were selected by the SAC during the initial phase of plan development. These corridors provide key connections to community destinations and nearby communities.

Map 1. Active Transportation Plan Study Area

Page 52 of 247

The overall vision of the ATP is to “provide safe, convenient, and comfortable active transportation facilities to promote the movement of people and goods; maximize transportation choice; promote liveability and sustainability; and minimize environmental impact.” Specific policy goals of Duncan, North Cowichan and the Cowichan Tribes are to: Increase safety for cyclists and pedestrians; Provide a suite of walking and bicycling facilities that allows people of all ages and abilities including people that use mobility devices, to use active transportation; Increase the mode share of active transportation trips, in support of other planning efforts such as greenhouse gas reduction targets; Develop an immediately implementable plan that identifies ready-to-move-forward projects; Encourage and enhance cooperation and coordination between government agencies; and Raise awareness of active transportation within the community to start a paradigm shift in the way people think about how they move around the region.

The ATP is intended for the community of people living in and visiting the Cowichan Valley. Through a robust public involvement strategy, their voices guided the development of this Plan and shaped the recommendations. By creating a Plan based on the preferences and goals of the local community, the Plan is more likely to be implemented with strong public support. The public involvement strategy for the ATP included an information booth and forum at the Farmers Market, a public survey, and multiple public meetings. The plan for public involvement and an analysis of its results is provided in Chapter 3, User Needs and Infrastructure Assessment.

Page 53 of 247

This section documents existing active transportation conditions in the Cowichan Valley. The analysis includes a review of the existing decision-making framework, infrastructure, policies and programs. The effort was supported by stakeholder interviews from community groups, law enforcement, the Ministry of Transportation and Infrastructure, and participating local jurisdictions including CVRD. The full analysis of existing conditions includes a detailed inventory (the Inventory) of the existing and potential active transportation network conducted in August 2011, a review of existing plans and policies that support the ATP, and an investigation into how operational decisions are currently made within and between organizations.

Thirteen plans and policies developed within the last five years were reviewed to assess the existing policy framework. There are many reasons to support bicycling and walking as transportation and recreation choices including fitness, stress reduction, and reduced transportation costs. The participating agencies have developed a strong policy framework to support the ATP. Most notably, each community supports walking and cycling for many of the reasons mentioned previously in its general planning guidance. The list of plans and policies reviewed is provided in Table 1 below. A summary of each of these documents can be found in Appendix A.

Table 1. Thirteen policies and plans were reviewed to assess the existing policy framework.

City of Duncan 2007 Official Community Plan

City of Duncan 2011 Commons Trail Feasibility Assessment

City of Duncan n/a Zoning Bylaw and Off Street Parking & Loading Bylaw

City of Duncan In progress Integrated Community Sustainability Plan

Municipality of North n/a Zoning Bylaw Cowichan Municipality of North 2011 Official Community Plan Cowichan Municipality of North 2013 Climate Action and Energy Plan Cowichan Municipality of North Undated Trails Network Plan (unpublished) Cowichan Page 54 of 247

Cowichan Valley Regional 2007 Regional Parks and Trail Master Plan District Ministry of Transportation and 2009 Trans-Canada Highway Corridor Management Plan Infrastructure Cowichan Tribes 2007-2009 Cowichan Tribes Greenhouse Gas and Carbon Footprint Report

Cowichan Tribes 2012 Comprehensive Community Plan

BC Transit 2011 BC Transit Future Plan 2011

BC Transit 2010 BC Transit 2030 Strategic Plan

Although Duncan, North Cowichan, and Cowichan Tribes (the Plan participants) have each supported policies that encourage active transportation and enhance its role in community planning, the policies could be enhanced to more comprehensively and explicitly support active transportation. To date, there has been a lack of formalized communication and decision-making processes among the Plan participants. The jurisdictions have had an informal relationship where transportation infrastructure is concerned. This informal relationship can be strengthened by institutionalizing a collaborative approach toward planning and implementing active transportation infrastructure and supportive programs.

Programs complement engineering improvements, such as bikeways, sidewalks and crossing treatments. Examples of programs designed to increase rates of walking and bicycling include Open Streets or Ciclovia events, individualized marketing programs that focus on the positive aspects of active transportation, Active and Safe Routes to School programs, Bike to Work challenges, ongoing crosswalk enforcement actions, and safety trainings. Encouragement, education, and enforcement programs give Duncan residents the tools they need to safely and confidently use the active transportation network. This section provides an overview of existing programs to support active transportation in Duncan and North Cowichan and Cowichan Tribes. Chapter 5 presents recommended programs to support the vision and goals of this plan. The recommendations include continuation of those administered by the City and other agencies and organizations, as well as additional programs that have proven to be popular and effective in other bicycle- and walk-friendly cities.

Page 55 of 247

Active transportation programs are a relatively inexpensive method for improving and raising public awareness and adding to the safety and enjoyment of bicyclists and pedestrians in Duncan. Programs also usually remain outside of the jurisdiction of any one agency. While the vast majority of infrastructure and policy recommendations fall within the exclusive jurisdiction of the City of Duncan and its governing authority, many program recommendations can, and should, require the participation of other partners including, other local governments/jurisdictions, private sector partners, and nonprofit organizations. To that end, the following is an assessment of the existing organizations and agencies that can contribute to or lead active transportation programs. City of Duncan Cowichan Sportsplex (Chesterfield Sports Society) Municipality of North Cowichan Royal Canadian Mounted Police (RCMP), Cowichan Tribes Community Policing Cowichan Green Community CVRD Safety Advisory Committee Cycle Cowichan Tourism agencies Duncan Farmers Market (City Square Organizations supporting individuals Market Society) with disabilities Canadian Cycling Association Seniors groups Valley Seniors Organization of Duncan Local bike shops Cowichan Valley Regional District, Parks Insurance Corporation of British Department Columbia Cycling BC British Columbia Ministry of BC Masters Cycling Transportation and Infrastructure Mayor’s Advisory Committee on Cyclingbc.net Disability Issues (MACDI) Bcmasterscycling.net Duncan Advisory Committee on Seniors’ Transport Canada Issues School District 79 Cowichan Valley Regional Transit System (BC Transit) Law enforcement agencies CVRD Safety Committee Transition Cowichan Page 56 of 247

Duncan and the North Cowichan and Cowichan Tribes have an opportunity to build on these existing and potential partners by collaborating in the development and implementation of active transportation programs.

This section documents existing active transportation facilities in the Cowichan Valley, in the study area identified on Map 1 (page 1-2). The Plan strives to provide easier access to quality facilities that make walking and cycling safe, convenient and comfortable for all types of trips including trips to work, school, home, and accessing services. Purely recreational facilities have not been considered as part of this plan. Further, the Inventory focused on the major road system that currently, or could potentially, play a role in active transportation. Many of the local streets have not been reviewed in detail (and may be missing inventory data such as the presence of sidewalks) because, with lower traffic volumes, they will generally be more comfortable to many cyclists. Map 2 (page 4-69) shows the functional classification of the street system in the study area, along with the corridors reviewed in detail as part of the Inventory. Functional classifications describe the character of service the road is intended to provide. For example, arterial roadways and highways are intended to move high volumes of people and goods efficiently, while local streets are designed to accommodate fewer users moving at slower speeds. Collectors typically attempt to balance access and mobility, with design speeds and roadway capacities falling between the (lower) ranges of local streets and (higher) ranges of arterial streets.

Walking is the most basic form of transportation and has a number of individual and community health, social, economic, and environmental benefits. Increases in walking can be achieved through: Reducing the distance between trip origins and destinations through effective land use planning; Providing safe, comfortable, and convenient walking routes; and Giving priority to pedestrians as the basis for a healthy transportation system.

Table 2 (page 2-8) provides a summary of the existing sidewalk and shoulder walkway network coverage along surveyed corridors within the study area. For higher-order roads (highways and arterials), the provision of a road shoulder that can be used by pedestrians has been defined as presence of sidewalk. The existing pedestrian network is shown on Map 4 (page 4-71).

Page 57 of 247

Table 2: Walkway Inventory of Surveyed Corridors in Study Area, August 2011

Local Streets Collectors Highway/Arterial All Surveyed Streets

Sidewalk Both Sides 2.7 km 3.1 km 4.3 km 10.1 km

Sidewalk One Side 1.1 km 1.0 km 0.1 km 2.2 km

No Sidewalk 1.9 km 0.6 km 0.0 km 2.5 km

Total 5.7 km 4.7 km 4.4 km 14.8 km

The majority of roadways included in the Inventory had a sidewalk or shoulder on at least one side of the roadway (Figure 2). This includes all highways and arterials, where traffic volumes are generally much higher. Some roadways in the downtown core have existing canopy cover provided by street trees. In general, the key corridors in the study area as the south-west side of the TCH between Beverly Street and University Way, have a fairly good coverage of sidewalks and marked crossings. Most streets have some form of walkway such as sidewalks or shoulders but not all are accessible for scooters or people with mobility impairments. Some notable exceptions include . Figure 2. Sidewalk, both sides of roadway. portions of Jubilee Street, Duncan Street, Chesterfield (Nagle Street) Avenue, and McKinstry Road. Sidewalks in the downtown commercial area are typically 1.5 metres wide, constructed from concrete and are typically in ‘good’, ‘fair’ or ‘excellent’ condition (see Appendix B for examples of facility quality ratings). Corridors where a portion of the sidewalk network is less than 1.5 metres wide, due to telephone poles or other infrastructure obstructions, require relocation or widening of the sidewalk. Corridors where a portion of the sidewalk network is less than 1.5 metres wide include Lakes Road, Beverly Street, Trans-Canada Highway, Government Street, Evans Street, and Jubilee Street. Figure 3. Allenby Road has sporadic sidewalk/shoulder coverage. Page 58 of 247

Further from downtown, sidewalk coverage becomes sporadic along the arterial and collector roadways that connect to surrounding activity nodes (e.g., Allenby Road, Government Street, Lakes Road, Tzouhalem Road, and the Trans-Canada Highway). Existing pedestrian facilities on these roadways are more likely to be paved roadway shoulders, which pedestrians share with bicyclists and occasionally motor vehicles. With or without fog lines, shoulders typically feel less safe and comfortable for pedestrians, who are forced to walk closer to motor vehicles traveling at higher speeds without the measure of separation afforded by a typical sidewalk. Some areas lack any pedestrian facilities, including large segments of Tzouhalem Road and Allenby Road (as shown in Figure 3)1. Missing shoulders of the Tzouhalem Road Bridge, east of the Duncan core, in combination with higher speed motor vehicle traffic create difficult pedestrian travel conditions. Inventoried facilities were generally in ‘good’ condition, although several corridors with heavy pedestrian use were in ‘poor’ condition, notably Allenby Road and Miller Road, which both have sporadic shoulders and poor pedestrian lighting.

Providing frequent and safe crossing opportunities is paramount to a successful pedestrian network. Pedestrian crossing opportunities can be enhanced using a variety of treatments including marked crosswalks (Figure 4), pedestrian activated signals (Figure 5), mid-block curb extensions, or by designing roads to allow safer crossings, (e.g., providing median refuge, signalized or flashing crossings, or altering signal timing to create gaps in traffic or an all-way pedestrian crossing opportunity).

Figure 4. Signed and marked crosswalk. Figure 5. Pedestrian Actuated Signal.

1 Though Tzouhalem Road is outside the study area it is the primary connection for many people living east of Duncan’s urban core. Page 59 of 247

In British Columbia, pedestrians have the right-of-way at marked or unmarked crosswalks, which are defined as: A portion of the roadway at an intersection or elsewhere distinctly indicated for pedestrian crossing by signs or by lines or other markings on the surface, or the portion of a highway at an intersection that is included within the connection of the lateral lines of the sidewalks on the opposite sides of the highway, or within the extension of the lateral lines of the sidewalk on one side of the highway, measured from the curbs, or in the absence of curbs, from the edges of the roadway. – Motor Vehicle Act RSBC Chapter 318 A crosswalk can also be created outside an intersection using road markings. Formalized crosswalks, marked with 3.0 metre “double lines” are frequent features in the urban areas of Duncan and are typically marked according to Transportation Association of Canada (TAC) standards. Marked crosswalks were located at all signalized intersections included in the Inventory. Few formalized crossings exist along collector and arterial roadways outside of downtown, and are particularly infrequent on Allenby Road, Tzouhalem Road, and the Trans-Canada Highway. Where signals do exist roadways are typically wide, which increases pedestrian exposure to motor vehicles. Both staff and members of the public commented that the time allotted to pedestrian crossings in many places do not provide a comfortable amount of time for those with mobility challenges to cross the road. Audible Pedestrian Signals (APS) are not present within the study area. Upgrade of existing signals or installation of new APS signals can be beneficial to pedestrians with visual impairments.

Pedestrian amenities including benches, trash receptacles and greeting signs were also noted in some areas. These amenities generally contribute to the attractiveness of the streetscape and create an environment that feels safe and comfortable for pedestrians. While not all sidewalks in the downtown and core residential area were part of the Inventory the conditions observed were consistent with casual observations of the downtown and core residential area. Lighting fixtures are generally spaced at every 30 – 100 metres along roadways included in the Inventory of the urbanized area. Pedestrian-scale fixtures are located in the downtown area (e.g., near City Hall). While providing light, these fixtures throughout the system sometimes obstruct pedestrian flow. Light fixtures along roadways outside of downtown are placed less frequently, generally every 40 – 150 metres. Many intersections could benefit from enhanced lighting, which could increase bicycle and pedestrian visibility.

Page 60 of 247

The bicycle network includes roadways and dedicated rights-of-way that have facilities to accommodate bicycles. The following types of bikeways were included in the Inventory shown on Map 5 (page 4-73): Paved Shoulder\Shoulder Bikeway – These are paved roadways that have striped shoulders wide enough for bicycle travel as shown in Figure 6, are typically a 1.5 metre paved shoulder (1.2 metre minimum in constrained areas). Roadways with shoulders less than 1.2 metres are considered shared roadways. Shoulder bikeways are signed to alert motorists Figure 6. Unsigned shoulder bikeway. to expect cyclists. Signing of shoulders within the study area was infrequent. Bike Lane - Bike lanes, shown in Figure 7, are portions of the roadway designated specifically for bicycle travel via a striped lane and pavement stencils. The standard width of a typical bicycle lane is 1.5 metres (minimum of 1.2 metres if constrained against a curb or adjacent to a parking lane). Bike lanes are most appropriate on arterials and major collectors, where high traffic Figure 7. Bike lanes on Cowichan Lake volumes and speeds warrant greater separation. Road.

Shared Use Paths/Multi-Use Trail –Shared use paths are used by a variety of non-motorized users, including pedestrians, cyclists, skaters, and runners. Shared use paths may be paved or unpaved, and are typically wider than an average sidewalk (i.e. 3.0 – 4.3 metres). In circumstances where peak traffic is expected to be low, pedestrian traffic is not expected to be more than occasional, good passing opportunities can be provided, and maintenance vehicle loads are not expected to damage pavement, the width may be reduced to as little as 2.4 metres. Shared use paths can be paved or unpaved. User types may differ based on paving material. For example a person using a mobility aid may have difficulty using an unpaved trail.

The existing bikeway network includes: Shoulder bikeway: 1.8 kilometres. Shoulder bikeways are provided on several corridors including, Beverly Street, Jubilee Street, Ingram Street and Duncan Street. An additional 2.7 kilometres of existing roadway shoulder was inventoried but did not meet the minimum width standard, of 1.5m. These roadways may not feel safe and comfortable for all bicyclists.

Page 61 of 247

Bike lanes: 0.5 kilometres. Bike lanes are provided along Cowichan Lake Road and are approximately 1.0 metres in width (below the minimum standard). Bicycle lanes are also provided on University Way, but were not inventoried as part of the survey. Shared use path: 4.9 kilometres. Shared use trails within the study area vary by surface and composition. The Trans-Canada Trail connections are generally surfaced with crushed gravel and were found to be in ‘good’ or ‘excellent’ condition for pedestrians, but not necessarily for bicyclists. Typical trail widths varied between 1.0 and 3.0 metres while several sections were more constrained. Throughout the shared use trail system there are segments that may create challenging conditions for cyclists because of the trail surface, facility width, condition, or topography.

Cyclist crossings are often difficult at major intersection as detection is not present at most of the signalized intersections, nor are push buttons conveniently located that would allow a cyclist to activate the traffic signal, which may result in cyclists crossing into the pedestrian realm of sidewalk and crosswalk (Figure 8). Overall, the bicycle network covers approximately 2.3 kilometres (16%) of the 14.8 kilometres of roadway surveyed within the study area. An additional 4.9 kilometres of shared use path augments the existing on-street bicycle Figure 8. Cyclist crossing utilizing the facilities. Although largely disconnected, the crosswalk. bikeway facilities shown on Map 5 (page 4-73) provide the start of a more comprehensive cycling network and many local streets currently provide safe and attractive cycling options.

Bike parking is a critical component of a community’s bikeway network, and can strongly influence one’s decision whether to complete a trip via bicycle. Examples of existing bicycle parking include existing wave racks at Vancouver Island University, shown in Figure 9, and Figure 9. Example of wave-style rack. modified coat hanger style racks at Cowichan Commons. A survey of parking quantity and quality was conducted focusing on key destinations in the downtown core, such as the Craig Street corridor; results are shown on Map 3 (page 2-13). Additional details on existing bicycle parking are provided in Appendix C. Page 62 of 247

Generally, the racks observed during August 2011 were wave shared racks or modified coat hanger style racks (Figure 10). While both of these racks will support a bicycle frame and allow locking of at least one wheel it is considered difficult to lock both wheels to the rack. Wave-style or undulating bike racks may not always allow sufficient room between bicycles for users to securely park bicycles. Racks placed closer to shop entrances and within a good line of sight will have higher utilization rates. The majority of parking observed during this study was considered Class 2 (short- term). Longer-term bicycle parking (Class 1), which Figure 10. Modified coat-hanger style provides protection from the elements and racks. increased security via secured entry (e.g., a bike cage) was reported at the Cowichan District Hospital. The average number of precipitation days each month in Duncan is nearly 13, which indicates that many bicyclists would benefit from additional sheltered bike parking.

Other end-of-trip facilities include changing rooms and lockers, where cyclists can store excess gear and shower before going about their daily activities. Changing rooms and lockers may be provided by a building owner and are typically difficult to track. Changing rooms and lockers were reported at the Cowichan District Hospital and may exist in other private buildings within the study area, but a formal inventory was not completed as part of this study.

MapMap 3 Bike 3 Bike parking parking inventory inventory for downtown for downtown Duncan, Duncan August August2011 Page 63 of 247

The project team conducted a series of face-to-face and phone interviews in September and October 2011 with agency staff and local stakeholders that play a role in active transportation in the Cowichan Valley. These stakeholders included planning, engineering, or public works staff from: The City of Duncan The Municipality of North Cowichan Cowichan Tribes Cowichan Valley Regional District (CVRD) Ministry of Transportation and Infrastructure (MOTI)

A number of common themes emerged in how the local jurisdictions interact with each other and other levels of government. The following is a summary of findings from the interviews conducted by the project team.

Planning Activities – Since it has not been identified as a high priority to date, little dedicated staff time or resources have been allocated to active transportation. This trend is changing over time as evidenced by the ATP planning process, strengthened pedestrian and cycling initiatives in North Cowichan’s OCP, Development Permit Guidelines, Climate Action and Energy Plan and the Cowichan Tribes stated desire to include ATP recommendations in their forthcoming Community Comprehensive Plan. Historically, planning staff have targeted bicycle and pedestrian improvements through individual development permit application requirements or roadway safety improvement projects. Staff members are assigned to projects as needed. None of the agencies have formally committed a staff member or a percentage of staff hours to focus on active transportation. Engineering Activities – Engineers and Parks and Recreation staff have always been involved with the development of several trails, pedestrian improvements in the downtown areas (e.g., pedestrian bump- outs), and support as requested for active transportation projects. Though interviewees saw the ATP primarily as a planning effort, all interviewees expressed the need to work cooperatively and collaboratively with their respective engineering departments. Programmatic Activities – Staff at Duncan, North Cowichan, and Cowichan Tribes have opportunities to participate in programs related to active transportation, such as the Bike to Work commute challenge. Programmatic activities intended for the public currently have some support from the City, District or Tribes and are implemented within the school system or through other community oriented entities. Funding – Active transportation projects are funded through a variety of sources including a line item in the public works budget, gas tax funds, Insurance Corporation of British Columbia (ICBC) safety grants, and other federal or provincial sources. Redevelopment frequently leads to improved pedestrian and cycling facilities along frontages and within a site. To date, trail projects have been funded more successfully than on-street bicycling infrastructure, though interviews suggested this was due, in part, to a lack of comprehensive cycling and pedestrian planning. A breakdown of funding dedicated to active Page 64 of 247

transportation by jurisdiction was not available. It is often difficult to track dedicated funding as bicycle and pedestrian improvements are often wrapped into larger roadway improvement projects rather than tracked as standalone figures. Internal Communication – Interviewees reported that communication between departments was typically casual and unstructured. While successful on a project-by-project basis, the lack of regular communication has resulted in unexpected disconnects (e.g., lack of agreement on infrastructure priorities) and reduced effectiveness in active transportation initiatives undertaken by a single department. There is limited integration between planning and engineering with respect to capital improvement projects. Formal avenues for communication within agencies include Duncan’s regular Management Team meetings where department managers discuss ongoing projects and planning initiatives. These formal meetings are restricted by time constraints and staff capacity.

Duncan, North Cowichan, and Cowichan Tribes have a shared interest in managing and developing systems that transcend administrative boundaries, including the active transportation system. Through the interview process it was determined that transportation engineering staff was in closer contact with colleagues in neighbouring communities on some issues than they were with other departments within their own municipality. The transportation engineers of each entity, as well as other interested parties, regularly participate in a quarterly Traffic Advisory Committee meeting chaired by ICBC, where safety concerns are discussed and addressed. These meetings provide a venue for staff to problem solve and share resources, such as potential new design standards. Outside of this quarterly meeting, business is typically conducted through cooperative and informal conversations, with documentation as necessary (e.g., when work is contracted). In the last ten years, the trend has been towards a more formal and collaborative relationship between Duncan, North Cowichan, and Cowichan Tribes. Precedent for a formal working relationship is set forth in the 2003 Cowichan Valley Bridge Building Protocol Agreement, the 2007 Cowichan Place Partners Memorandum of Understanding, and the Joint Utility Board 2008 Working Agreement detailing regional sewage treatment practices. All parties interviewed expressed interest in continued and increased collaboration, particularly with respect to active transportation initiatives.

As the local regional government, the CVRD’s responsibilities relating to active transportation include long range planning for Electoral Areas, management and development of regional parks and trails, and management of the local transit system. Key interests and activities include development of the Cowichan Valley Trail and local connections, maintenance of existing parks and trail facilities, strengthening of cycling/transit connections, and greater linkage between urban and rural cycling routes. Recent successes have included grant funding for trail planning and bridge rehabilitation. Page 65 of 247

The CVRD currently works with parks and trail planners informally in North Cowichan and Duncan to develop more cohesive parks and trail systems. In addition to long range planning, the CVRD enacts pedestrian friendly design through the zoning process and requirement of trail development within new rights of way and pedestrian access in cul-de-sacs as part of new development. Regular communication occurs between CVRD and the Chief Administrative Officers of member municipalities including the Cowichan Tribes.

In addition to primary responsibility for the Trans-Canada Highway, MOTI has responsibility for roadways on Cowichan Tribes land, CVRD land and other roadways outside and within the administrative boundaries of Duncan and North Cowichan. Additional responsibilities include general right-of-way guidance (e.g., The Pedestrian Crossing Control Manual for British Columbia), OCP review and comment, and approval of rezoning within 800 metres of a controlled access provincial corridor such as the TCH. A key cycling-related policy includes the provision of bicycle facilities when a roadway is rebuilt.

Within the Duncan area, MOTI’s primary interests include pedestrian safety issues along the Trans- Canada Highway, pedestrian crossings of the Trans-Canada Highway, increasing network connectivity for all users, and increasing the availability and use of transit service. The Ministry is currently less focused on cycling improvements but is generally supportive of separated facilities on highway corridors. At this time no separated facilities have been designed or constructed that fall within the Highway right-of-way. City staff felt that MOTI could benefit from a more detailed investigation of treatments in the urbanized core that would provide increased pedestrian refuge and reduce distance between protected crossings. Efficient communication of questions and concerns related to MOTI’s (e.g., requests for maintenance and safety concerns) are relayed through area managers who can provide a solution or escalate the request as necessary. Safety concerns for all roadway users are typically addressed through quarterly meetings of the safety committee chaired by ICBC.

The following shared concerns were identified through the operational interview process: Limited staff capacity. The biggest barrier facing active transportation, according to interviewees, is limited time and staff capacity due to lack of ATP priority. The analysis of existing operations is intended to identify areas where efficiencies can be gained and provide information that will help increase staff capacity (e.g., through increased and relevant communication). Lack of design standards and design guidelines. Several interviewees indicated that a lack of training and technical expertise has resulted in non-viable facility design or no facility construction. Staff would benefit from training on active transportation designs that promote safety and accessibility for people of all ages and abilities. Page 66 of 247

Lack of knowledge of active transportation principles. Several interviewees noted that a lack of knowledge or passion for active transportation at the highest political and administrative levels of an organization resulted in a lack of commitment at the staff level. Limited funding for active transportation. Interviewees generally noted that active transportation was funded from several sources, but funds were not viewed as one single pot of money that could be used to improve system safety and efficiency. The piecemeal approach to funding, as well as competing priorities has resulted in fragmented construction of the existing active transportation infrastructure. Limited communication between departments or agencies. Staff noted that communication does occur and short-term or immediate problems are solved, but the lack of communication can create challenges with regard to project development, funding, prioritization, and construction both in the long term and short term. This challenge, while it tends to occur more frequently between agencies or groups, also occurs between departments within an organization.

Providing an environment that feels safe is important to encourage new pedestrians and cyclists. Currently, enforcement is enacted by either a call for service or upon observation (e.g., during regular patrol activity). RCMP’s primary pedestrian and cycling related activities involve patrol of areas with high motor vehicle volumes and incidence of collisions. In addition, the Community-Policing Unit coordinates with volunteer members who conduct speed watches to compare actual travel speed to posted speed, and provide bike rodeos and other children’s education events. The general duty patrol officer receives training in cycling and pedestrian use of the right-of-way during basic officer training at the beginning of his or her career with RCMP. Officers believe that one key implementation challenge is low helmet usage among adults. Officers on bicycles patrol the downtown core, parks and trails, and other problem areas throughout the summer months and at selected times during the rest of the year. Bicycle patrol officers are generally involved with street level drug and liquor enforcement as well as general education and enforcement.

Police response to crash events is complaint-driven. Calls for service increase with the seriousness of the related injuries or when multiple parties are involved. When a serious injury or fatality occurs, RCMP coordinates with South Island Traffic Enforcement, a collaboration of local police detachments and ICBC. ICBC and RCMP also frequently coordinate local governments to identify areas of concern within the roadway network and develop solutions mutually agreeable to the involved parties.

The RCMP has an interest in reducing the number of response events by promoting safety both in site design and user behaviour. One principle mentioned by the RCMP is Crime Prevention through Environmental Design (CPTED), which recommends simple environmental solutions such as providing Page 67 of 247

adequate lighting in activity areas and trimming trees and shrubs to improve sightlines and visibility along trails to make users feel more comfortable.

The Duncan Area Active Transportation recognizes the value of active transportation and reduced dependence on private automobiles. This Plan’s implementation will lead to visible change and will encourage a paradigm shift in the community. The existing pedestrian and cycling networks include some facilities on major roadways and a network of local streets. This foundation can be leveraged to create a connected active transportation network that is safe, comfortable, and convenient for people of all ages and ability levels. Area jurisdictions have recognized the importance of active transportation in policy documents and are in need of a systematic policy, design approach, and design standards and guidelines to incorporate active transportation improvements as they move towards with implementation. Page 68 of 247

The Duncan area’s active transportation needs are diverse and depend on many factors, including the existing infrastructure. This section provides an assessment of local user needs, determined through a multi-faceted public involvement process, and of the opportunities and constraints of Duncan’s active transportation infrastructure. This assessment builds upon the review provided in Chapter 2. The summary of public involvement includes comments heard at the farmer’s market, a summary of responses to the survey, and identification of exemplary and problematic locations. The analysis of the existing active transportation infrastructure focuses on corridors identified by the SAC at the start of analysis of existing network based on: Safety, connectivity, completeness, service of key destinations, service of different user types (e.g., seniors and people with mobility impairments) Gap analysis Assessment of public interest groups and involvement in active transportation Policy and organizational recommendations Assessment of user experience Review of enforcement policies and best practices

Public involvement is integral to the development of an active transportation plan that considers the needs of the public and promotes plan implementation by building support. The ATP is intended for the community of people living in and visiting the Cowichan Valley. Allowing their voices to guide this process and shape these recommendations creates a plan that is more likely to be implemented with strong public support.

The most intensive public outreach was conducted at the beginning of the project to allow the project team to hear existing issues, identify examples of effective active transportation within the Cowichan Valley, understand concerns and priorities of the public and provide information to the public about the project. Page 69 of 247

Outreach was conducted using a variety of media including the following: A stall set up at the Duncan Farmer’s Market provided some background information and an opportunity for members of the public to speak with the project team and note their concerns, interests, and success stories. An active transportation survey was made available at the Farmer’s Market, and on the project partners’ websites. The participating agencies established project websites to provide information on the project, offer the active transportation survey, and publish project deliverables. A meeting hosted by Cycle Cowichan on September 22, 2011 to brainstorm ideas for infrastructure improvements.

The project team set up a stall at the Duncan Farmer’s Market on Saturday, August 13, 2011, to introduce the project to the public and gather feedback on active transportation in the community. In particular, the survey asked for examples of active transportation that worked well and ones respondents would like to see repeated; locations where it was unsafe, inconvenient, or uncomfortable to walk or cycle; and what type of improvements would most likely make respondents walk or cycle more often. Approximately 40 people completed surveys related to walking and cycling. Many of these people also provided comments on locations within the city where they would like to see infrastructure improvements. Many people also provided input via the active transportation plan web survey, resulting in a final sample size of 130 survey responses. A copy of the survey is included in Appendix D2. Exemplary and problematic active transportation locations were combined with input from the Active Transportation Survey (see below) and are represented on Maps 6 and 7 (pages 4-75 and 4-77).

2 The web survey included an additional question showing respondents pictures and asking which bikeway types they preferred as well as which types of unmarked roadways they would feel comfortable riding on. Page 70 of 247

About half of the respondents, noted that they walk at least once a day. (Figure 11). These results indicate that some people may not account for all of their everyday walking trips, which could include trips to their mailbox or from their car to a store. Figure 11. How often do you walk?

As shown in Figure 12, the reasons most people walk include health and fitness

(26 percent), shopping and Figure 11. How often do you walk? running errands (17 percent) and accessing regional parks and trails (16 percent). This indicates that Duncan area residents walk both for recreation and utilitarian purposes. More people reported walking (4 percent), rather than cycling (2 percent) to access transit, though fewer people are walking to work (7 percent) compared to cycling to work (20 percent). This is consistent with the longer distances a person can cycle, compared to walking, and the distance between home and work. Figure 12. Where do you walk to? Page 71 of 247

Figure 13 shows people most frequently reported that they walk for health and fitness (42 percent) or to reduce their carbon footprint (30 percent). It is worthwhile to point out that some people walk because they cannot drive or cannot afford a car. While the original survey did not provide these specific prompts, it is assumed these reasons are a subset of the ‘to save money’ and the ‘I do not own a car’ answers. Figure 13. Why do you walk?

Most people (83 percent) felt that conditions for walking were ‘Good’ or ‘Fair’ and relatively few (17 percent) thought conditions were ‘Poor.’ When asked about the biggest barriers to walking (Figure 14), respondents most commonly indicated people driving too quickly, a lack of connected facilities, and the presence of too many motor vehicles. Though sidewalks exist on most roadways in Duncan, barriers still exist. Examples include discontinuous sidewalks, areas where the sidewalk is obstructed by utility poles, and Figure 14. What are your biggest barriers to walking more? intersections without curb ramps.

Page 72 of 247

Of the respondents, nearly two-thirds (60 percent) reported that they are daily or weekly riders. About 8 percent of people reported that they have a bicycle but do not use it, while 13 percent of respondents report that they cycle once a month or less (Figure 15). These results illustrate that, while many people have bicycles and may be interested in increasing the frequency of their cycling trips, most people who took the survey already bicycle at least occasionally. Because survey participants self- selected, the results may not represent the views of all area residents, but Figure 15. How often do you bike? rather there is a bias toward people that already bicycle with some frequency.

Though health/fitness was the most- frequently cited reason to bicycle (29 percent), using a bicycle to travel between home and work (20 percent) or to pick up groceries and run errands (21 percent) also proved popular reasons to cycle. Few people reported accessing transit or cycling to school as common reasons to ride (Figure 16). School-related bicycling was likely impacted by the (adult) age of most survey respondents. Figure 17 shows that many people choose to bicycle for health and fitness (33 percent) or to reduce their carbon footprints (30 percent). These results indicate that Figure 16.Where do you bike? cyclists in Duncan are using bicycles for transportation in addition to recreational use.

Page 73 of 247

While the majority of respondents (53 percent) reported that cycling conditions were ‘Fair’, one third of people (33 percent) thought conditions were ‘Poor’ and only 14 percent rated conditions as ‘Good’ indicating that work will be necessary to create a first-rate cycling system. Figure 17 indicates the top concerns for bicyclists in Duncan include poor facility condition (24 percent), high traffic volumes Figure 17. What are your top reasons for biking? (21 percent), and gaps in the facility network (20 percent).

User facility preference typically varies with a bicyclist’s skill level, trip purpose, and individual characteristics, and there is no simple rule for determining what users prefer3. However, as the level of separation increases, a facility becomes more attractive to a wider range of bicycle users, making bicycling a more viable and preferred transportation mode. Figure 18. What are the biggest barriers to bicycling?

3 Information on user types is provided in the Design Guidelines. Page 74 of 247

Currently, roadways in the Duncan area require that cyclists ride in traffic in standard motor vehicle lanes (Figure 19) or within wide motor vehicle lanes (Figure 20). The majority of survey respondents (78 percent) reported that while they would not feel comfortable sharing a standard lane, most people (70 percent) would feel comfortable sharing a wide outside lane. When asked what types of facilities they would feel comfortable using, most respondents opted for bikeways that would provide physical separation from motor vehicles. Figure 21 shows the top rated facilities are bicycle paths (88 Figure 19. Roadway with standard percent), multi use paths and cycle tracks (86 motor vehicle lane, Coronation percent each). Respondents also ranked Avenue. neighbourhood bikeways and shared roadways highly (83 percent and 82 percent respectively). Neighbourhood bikeways may be more comfortable for users of all types and abilities as they are facilities that take advantage of the local roadway network and additionally prioritize cycling and walking by installing traffic calming and infrastructure designed to encourage slow motor vehicle travel. Bicycle routes may simply be signed roadways. While bicycle lanes scored lowest, this could be impacted by the limited examples that are available in the Duncan area. The existing bike lanes on Government Street north of Gibbins Road are only 1 metre wide Figure 20. Roadway with a wide motor vehicle lane, Trunk Road. rather than the 1.5-metre minimum used in many communities. These narrow bicycle lanes provide some dedicated roadway space but are likely uncomfortable for many cyclists because they do not provide adequate clear space between a motor vehicle and the curb. Page 75 of 247

Figure 21. Which types of bicycle facilities would you be comfortable using?

Respondents to the online survey and at the Farmer’s Market provided the following general feedback on cycling and walking in Duncan4. Key themes are listed below; a complete listing of comments is included for reference in Appendix E. Many roadways are too narrow to comfortably accommodate both cyclists and motor vehicles (e.g., Trunk Road and Government Street). Wide shoulders could be marked as bike lanes. Opportunities exist on roadways that are already wide (e.g., Canada Avenue). Crosswalks throughout the City of Duncan are faded and difficult to see. Sidewalks can create challenges for users with mobility impairments. Challenges include rough, slanted, and cracked sidewalks, as well as sidewalks that lack transitions (e.g., curb ramps). Traffic signals should provide aids for the visually impaired. Utility poles create obstructions on sidewalks in several locations (e.g., Jubilee Street and Duncan Street). More transit service is desirable, both fixed-route transit and shuttle service. Education and encouragement would be beneficial. The preliminary programs should focus on safe roadway/trail cycling. Crossing the Trans-Canada Highway is difficult for both cyclists and pedestrians. Maps 6 and 7 (pages 4-75 and 4-77) note the locations of specific geographic concern.

4 In some instances, feedback was provided for roadways outside the study area. This information is captured in Appendix E, but will not be addressed as part of this planning process. Page 76 of 247

On September 22, 2011 the consultants, Bunt and Associates; members of Cycle Cowichan; and City of Duncan staff met to review maps documenting existing conditions. Members of Cycle Cowichan shared information about locations that function well, ones needing improvement, and where signs should be installed. Generally, members were positive about the existing bike racks in downtown Duncan and painted bike lanes in several places. Places where improvements were deemed necessary included many collector and arterial roadways (e.g., Trunk Road and the Trans-Canada Highway). The organization is involved in several outreach activities including: Bike to Work Week – which is organized with over 25 sponsors; Policy Outreach – which including letter writing and contacting local politicians to voice concerns about active transportation issues; and Group Rides – organized by local bike shops and email newsletter.

Trans-Canada Trail, Pipeline Trail, Friendship Trail and Somenos Trail Painted shoulder on Herd Road, Maple Bay Road, and elsewhere in North Cowichan Painted bike lanes on Cowichan Lake Road and Somenos roundabout to Gibbins roundabout Bike racks in downtown Duncan New bike racks in a number of locations including Craig Street, Vancouver Island University, and on buses, and bike lockers at the Cowichan Valley District Hospital

Lake Cowichan Road/Government Street from Gibbins roundabout to Downtown Duncan Beverly Street from Lakes Road to Canada Avenue Trans-Canada Highway from Boys Road to Beverly Street, especially the connection with the dike trail Tzouhalem Road from Maple Bay Road to Lakes Road Trunk Road/Coronation Avenue from Lakes Road to Downtown Duncan Craig Street and Allenby Road from downtown Duncan to the Trans-Canada Highway Facilities that will improve comfort on Cairnsmore Street and Government Street and Allenby Need improved bike facilities on/along the Trans-Canada Highway or information on how to safely share existing facilities

5 The categorical summary and description here was provided by Cycle Cowichan. Several of these corridors/locations mentioned include crash locations documented by ICBC.

Page 77 of 247

"Share the road" or "bicycles must occupy full lane" signs at all of the roundabouts Informative signs about how to access the Trans-Canada Trail, Somenos Trail, etc. Sign a north / south and east / west route with good wayfinding signage Bike Route signs for a safe Duncan-Cowichan Bay ride "Bikes must occupy full lane" or "No passing bikes on a bridge" on all of the bridges Bike racks at major public facilities like the library and Aquatic Centre, improved racks near Craig Street Renovations, new racks at Village Green Mall, and secure bike parking for commuters riding transit to Victoria Connections on University Way to the mall and downtown Green marking paint to highlight where cycling and car traffic converges.

Regional standards for on and off-street bicycle facilities Develop a permanent Regional Active Transportation Advisory Committee that includes local politicians Encourage accountability of local and regional governments to champion and implement active transportation support programs and infrastructure

Education and practical advice; including courses for children Networking Advocacy

This section analyzes the existing active transportation network by considering the adequacy of existing facilities and evaluating “user experience” on existing facilities. Data used in this analysis was collected during the late summer and fall of 2011 and includes the roadway inventory (Inventory) and existing GIS data provided by Duncan, North Cowichan and CVRD. In November, 2011 the project team reviewed the existing active transportation network to determine the adequacy of existing facilities based on the following criteria: Safety Connectivity and completeness of the network Ability to serve key destinations Barriers and constraints User experience (a measure of comfort and of the ability of the bicycle network to serve the needs of different types of bicyclists) Each of these criteria and their associated evaluations are described below, followed by a summary of the evaluation at the end of the sub-section. Page 78 of 247

Crashes involving pedestrians and cyclists tend to be more severe than automobile-only crashes. Cyclists and pedestrians represented 13 percent and 2 percent respectively of national roadway fatalities between 2004 and 20086. Nationally, 75 percent of pedestrian fatalities occurred on urban roads, and 60 percent of pedestrian fatalities occurred when pedestrians were attempting to cross the roadway. Elderly pedestrians are disproportionally represented in national fatality statistics, representing about 35 percent of deaths and 13 percent of the population. Their higher mortality rate is typically due to reduced visual acuity and ability to judge approaching motor vehicle speeds. The majority of fatality crashes (60 percent) occurred during dim light conditions or at night. Cyclists are involved in approximately 2 percent of all roadway fatalities; crashes typically impact cyclists who are at least 16 years old and 34 percent of all incidents occurred at night. Approximately 19 percent of cyclist fatalities involved a heavy truck or other large motor vehicle.

Figure 22. Top 20 Crash Locations 2006 to 2010

6 Transport Canada. “Road Safety in Canada.” 2011. Web. 17 Nov 2011.

Page 79 of 247

Rates of injuries and fatalities among pedestrians and bicyclists in British Columbia reflect national trends.7 ICBC provided summary level information for pedestrian- and bicycle-involved crashes. Figure 22 illustrates the top 20 crash locations from 2006 – 2010; the top four crash locations involving the most pedestrians and/or cyclists are: Trans-Canada Highway and Trunk Road Cowichan Way and Trans-Canada Highway Festubert Street, Trunk Road, and the Mall Access Marchmont Road, McKinstry Road and Trunk Road These roadways are classified as arterials or collectors and the BC Digital Roadway Atlas designates them as roadways in which the primary purpose is to provide motor vehicle access. These locations are consistent with the top 20 casualty crash locations for the same period. Crashes involving cyclists and/or pedestrians also frequently occurred along Canada Avenue and Jubilee Street. Factors most frequently cited as contributing crash factors in bicycle and pedestrian crashes by the police and reported by ICBC were “Driver inattention” and “Failure to Yield Right of Way.” The top ten reported factors in bicycle and pedestrian crashes in order of most frequent to least frequent include8: Driver inattention Failing To Yield Right Of Way Driver error/confusion Driving On Wrong Side Of Road Weather (fog, sleet, rain, snow) Pedestrian Error/Confusion Ignoring Traffic Control Device Alcohol Road Condition (ice, snow, slush, water) Glare-Sunlight The contributing factors list includes crashes that did not involve a cyclist or pedestrian; however, this information still provides insight into factors that increase cyclist/pedestrian risk. These contributing factors are consistent with behaviors known to be particularly dangerous for cyclists and pedestrians in other US and Canadian cities.

7 Insurance Corporation of British Columbia. “Traffic Collision Statistics.” 1997. Web. 17 Oct. 2012.

8 Each involved party may be assigned up to 4 contributing factors. Information provided by ICBC did not include information about frequency of factor assignment to cyclists, motor vehicles, or pedestrians. Page 80 of 247

A gap analysis was conducted to identify missing segments and underserved locations in the existing pedestrian and bikeway network. Gaps were classified as follows (Figure 23): Spot gaps: point locations lacking active transportation facilities or with an observed/documented safety issue (e.g., missing crosswalks, bike lane “drops” etc.). Connection gaps: missing segments (typically less than 0.5 km long) between routes or connecting to land uses. Lineal gaps: missing segments or barriers along an otherwise well connected corridor (e.g., bike lanes “dropping” for several blocks or a missing bridge crossing along a trail). Corridor gaps: missing links longer than 1.6 km that can encompass an entire street where facilities are desired but do not currently exist. System gaps: larger geographic areas (e.g., a neighbourhood or business district) where few or no bikeways exist. Facility quality gaps: In some cases, a formalized bikeway itself may represent a gap despite its status as part of a designated network. This condition typically occurs when a corridor (often a major street) lacks the type of Figure23. Example of typical gaps. bicycle facilities to comfortably accommodate a broader user base, including infrequent or less confident cyclists. Other examples include roadway corridors lacking formalized facilities (e.g., bike lanes) where conditions such as higher vehicle speeds and volumes would otherwise justify greater separation between motorists and cyclists. Gaps typically exist where physical or other constraints impede development of the bikeway or pedestrian networks. Example constraints may include bike lanes "dropping" at an intersection to provide space for vehicle turn lanes, narrow bridges on existing roadways, severe cross-slopes, or potential environmental impacts associated with wider pavement widths. Traffic mobility standards and other policy decisions may also lead to gaps in a network. For instance, a community’s strong desire for on-street parking or increased vehicle capacity may hinder efforts to install continuous bicycle lanes along a major street. As part of this project, facility information was collected for a number of potential active transportation corridors. This information is helpful in establishing a cycling and walking system; however, there are gaps throughout the mapped network that can create uncomfortable cycling and walking conditions. These gaps are

Page 81 of 247

shown on Maps 8 and 9 (pages 4-79 and 4-81) respectively and were identified through field investigation, review of existing planning documents, and public comment. In general, Duncan has a fairly well-connected walking network and an incomplete and disconnected cycling system. Spot gaps and Facility quality gaps disrupt the connectivity and utility of the network. The best general street connectivity exists in downtown Duncan and east of the Trans-Canada Highway, where the denser street grid and lower traffic speeds and volumes allow cyclists a greater range of route choices and afford pedestrians opportunities to walk. However, even in this area, north-south connectivity is limited by physical features such as the Cowichan River and few alternatives exist for the higher speed arterial streets, such as Trunk Road or the Trans-Canada Highway.

Facility quality gaps commonly exist where pedestrians are accommodated via a roadway shoulder (e.g., the Trans-Canada Highway north of Dingwall Street). While a wide shoulder may be an appropriate facility for more rural environments, formalized sidewalks or a pathway that provides increased separation from motor vehicle traffic are recommended. Notable shoulder gaps also exist on Allenby Road, Lakes Road, and portions of Cowichan Way. The Jubilee Street corridor between Evans Street and White Road has numerous power pole obstructions. Other corridors with many power pole obstructions include Canada Avenue north of Beverly Street, Ingram Street, Queens Road, portions of Government Street, and the Trans-Canada Highway. Another type of facility gap exists where sidewalks are of poor quality and are sufficiently cracked enough that a mobility-impaired individual may have a difficult time traversing them or locations where curb drops are not present or their design makes use difficult. Areas with poor pavement quality include Beverly Street, portions of Duncan Street, and Allenby Road. Other facility gaps exist where the proposed sidewalk does not provide a minimum of 1.5 metres of clear space to accommodate two pedestrians walking side-by-side. Narrow sidewalks include Jubilee Street, Evans Street, and Beverly Street.

Conventional intersections may be considered a Spot gap for pedestrians where crosswalks are missing, frequent crashes indicate need for a safety improvement, or signal timing does not allow enough time for a user to comfortably cross the roadway. Intersections identified as Spot gaps for safety reasons include Trans-Canada Highway/Trunk Road, Cowichan Way/Trans-Canada Highway, Festubert Street/Trunk Road/Mall Access, and Marchmont Road/McKinstry Road/Trunk Road. Many Duncan residents felt that crossings of the Trans-Canada Highway do not allow time for a comfortable crossing. Respondents also felt that bridges represented Spot gaps for pedestrians due to narrow or missing pedestrian facilities. Page 82 of 247

Corridor and Lineal gaps exist where there are missing links between existing facilities on one or both sides of the roadway. Corridor gaps can also impede access to popular destinations such as schools, parks, trails, and senior facilities. Corridor gaps exist along Allenby Road, Beverly Street, McKinstry Road, and Lakes Road. In some cases, corridor gaps are identified along entire street corridors where facilities are desired but currently do not exist. In Duncan, corridor gaps were identified along Tzouhalem Road where east/west travel is difficult. Canada Avenue is also a Corridor gap north of Beverly Street, following the E&N Railway. If completed, this facility could provide a north-south alternative to the Trans-Canada Highway.

Though many of Duncan’s local roadways currently provide safe and comfortable places to ride, a general lack of dedicated (signed and marked) cycling facilities, and a network of arterial and collector roadways that serve as travel barriers for less confident cyclists, characterize the network.

Facility Quality gaps exist when a designated facility may not adequately serve user needs (e.g., bicycle lanes that are too narrow or bike lanes that drop at roundabouts or right turn lanes). While the bicycle lanes on Cowichan Lake Road north of Gibbins Road provide a measure of separation between cyclists and motor vehicle traffic, the 1-metre width does not meet the recommended TAC Standard minimum of 1.8 metres. Many jurisdictions use a less-generous, but still acceptable recommended 1.5 metre minimum.

There are a number of Spot gaps along Duncan’s roadways. Though the potential active transportation corridors are currently unsigned, these Spot gaps may affect people who currently choose to cycle on the roadways and trails. Spot gaps typically occur in Duncan in areas with heavy volumes of right-turning traffic or slip lanes that do not require vehicles to stop (e.g., Beverly Street/Canada Avenue, and Beverly Street/Trans-Canada Highway). In these locations, the lack of clarity for proper navigation can create uncomfortable conditions for people who bicycle. Conventional intersections may also be considered a Spot Gap for cyclists when bicycle detection is not provided at an actuated traffic control. In these locations, cyclists are required to run the light, wait for a motor vehicle to trigger the signal or get off their bicycle to use a pedestrian push button. These conditions typically exist at crossings of the Trans-Canada Highway (e.g., James Street). Spot gaps also occur at roundabouts where cyclists and motorists are unclear about proper positioning as well as in locations with a history of bicycle and pedestrian involved crashes (e.g., Trans-Canada Highway/Trunk Road). In many situations, the application of minimal treatments will result in enhanced system connectivity (e.g., addition of shared lane markings and signing at roundabouts). Additional Spot gaps exist where one facility transitions to another without adequate guidance for users or facility transition. For example, the intersection of Beverly Street and Lakes Road does not include a curb let down to allow trail users to transition to the roadway.

Page 83 of 247

Most of Duncan’s arterial and collector roadway network has been classified as Linear and Connection gaps. In most circumstances, these roadways represent the most direct pathways between popular destinations. It is possible to retrofit these roadways for bicycle use but with varying degrees of success. For example, Coronation Avenue and James Street could be reconfigured easily, but adding bicycle lanes to Trunk Road might require a road diet and result in reduced motor vehicle capacity, which can encourage active transportation by creating safer and more comfortable cycling conditions. Local roadways exist in several locations that could complement the arterial and collector network, providing routes for less confident cyclists to access destinations such as the Cowichan Sportsplex and McAdam Park.

One key to the development of a community that walks and bicycles for recreation and transportation is providing safe, accessible, attractive and desirable connections to destinations like parks, schools, and commercial areas. The following section provides a high-level description of the active transportation infrastructure around each destination.

Many of Duncan’s elementary schools are located on local roadways. Key barriers to access are created by arterial and collector roadways without existing bicycle facilities. Generally, destinations are more accessible for pedestrians than bicyclists.

The Sportsplex is served by Beverly Street and Lakes Road, which currently have incomplete and intermittent sidewalks and no marked bicycle facilities. Pedestrians traveling from east of Lakes Road may have difficulty accessing the Sportsplex. Protected crossing opportunities exist at Tzouhalem Road/Lakes Road and Trunk Road/Chesterfield Avenue.

Tzouhalem Road provides connections to and from residential areas to destinations along Trunk Road and to the Cowichan Tribes Urbanized area. The roadway has intermittent narrow shoulders and no continuous bicycle or pedestrian facilities, which equates to poor quality travel conditions. The narrow bridge crossing east of Lakes Road increases the collision risk for cyclists and pedestrians sharing roadway space with motor vehicles.

Downtown Duncan is well served with wide sidewalks, user amenities (e.g., benches), bicycle parking, streets with relatively low travel speeds and volumes, and numerous pedestrian oriented destinations. Downtown is bounded by Government Street to the south and west, relatively steep topography to the north, and Canada Avenue to the east. Page 84 of 247

Situated off Allenby Road, the Cowichan Tribes Office may be challenging for people who walk or bike, as the sidewalk is incomplete and the roadway is not marked for cyclists. The quality of the roadway surface can create challenging travel conditions for cyclists and pedestrians.

Pedestrians may access Centennial Park via a new multi-use trail on Government Street and cyclists may access the park via several lower speed and volume roadways near downtown Duncan. The gravel surface of the trail may create challenges for cyclists trying to access the park via the trail.

The Cowichan District Hospital may present a moderate challenge for cyclists accessing the facility via Government Street. Pedestrian travel is better accommodated through a fairly complete system of multi-use trail and sidewalks. Mid-block crossings throughout the corridor provide enhanced crossing opportunities. The gravel trail surface and lack of pedestrian-scale lighting in some areas may deter cyclists and pedestrians from using the trail system to access the hospital.

Bounded by Beverly Street and the Trans-Canada Highway, access to the University is complicated by a lack of dedicated bicycling facilities and requires complex intersection movements, which can increase the risk of collisions for both pedestrians and cyclists. Pedestrians and cyclists accessing the University from the south can complete the trip on local roads but not from the Trans-Canada Hwy.

The Trans-Canada Highway is the most heavily traveled roadway in the Duncan area. The road is characterized by two motor vehicle travel lanes in each direction, a center turn lane, and 1.5 – 2.0 metre sidewalks. In some areas, sidewalks are separated from the roadway by landscaping, but frequent driveway access and lack of pedestrian-oriented lighting reduce the road’s pedestrian-friendliness and walkability. Cyclists using the corridor typically use the sidewalk rather than riding in the roadway, which is an uncomfortable experience for most cyclists due to motor vehicle speeds and volumes. While using sidewalks increases cyclist separation from motor vehicles, mixing with pedestrians on the sidewalk increases the potential for bike/pedestrian conflicts. The Trans-Canada Highway is a key commercial corridor in the study area, access along and across the corridor is important for all active transportation users.

Located on James Street, the Island Savings Centre and Cowichan Aquatic Centre are served by complete sidewalks and several marked crosswalks. Bicycle and pedestrian access to the Centre is constrained from the east by a crossing of the Trans-Canada Highway.

Page 85 of 247

Factors that affect user comfort and experience include the facility type and width, adjacent motor vehicle volumes, proximity and speed of adjacent motor vehicles, presence of safe crossings, lighting, the aesthetics of the route (e.g., scenery or active land uses), and topography. Using available data, the project team scored each of the major active transportation routes based on the factors included in Table 3. These scores provide a picture of the conditions a user is likely to find in each corridor. However, people who walk and cycle may prefer different environments and have a different subjective evaluation of each corridor. The ATP identifies the suitability of cycling facilities based on user type (Figure 24) and illustrates them in the user experience maps, Map 10 and 11 (pages 4-83 and 4-85). Facilities that currently provide a lower quality experience (shown in gold) are Class 3 facilities, while adequate Class 2 experiences are in light green and high quality Class 1 experiences in dark green. Subsequent infrastructure recommendations are intended to improve the user experience to Class 1 or Class 2. Tables describing each factor and the scoring system are included in Appendix F.

Table 3. Active Transportation Comfort Evaluation Factors and Data Factor Used in Cycling Analysis Used in Pedestrian Analysis

Facility Type X X

Facility Width X

Surface Quality X X

Controlled Crossings X X

Posted Speed X

Roadway Classification X X

Aesthetics X X

Topography X

Completeness X

Figure 24. User type classification Page 86 of 247

Pedestrians in Duncan will find a fairly high quality walking experience on many of the previously identified potential active transportation corridors9. Facilities of the highest quality are typically multi-use pathways that are completely separated from the roadway or facilities on lower order roadways (e.g., local streets). Notable exceptions are arterial and collector streets, including Trunk Road between McKinstry Road and Chesterfield Avenue, which received a high score because it is barrier free, provides a protected crossing opportunity and is fairly wide. Areas typically receiving a low score were locations where a pedestrian facility did not exist, or exists on only one side, and along higher order roadways like the Trans-Canada Highway.

Like pedestrians, Duncan’s cyclists may have the best user experience on multi use trails, which are completely separated from motor vehicle traffic. Their experience is best when trails provide a smooth travel surface (e.g., asphalt or concrete) and have appropriate lighting. Cyclists will also have a fairly high quality experience on many of Duncan’s roadways with lower motor vehicle volumes and posted speeds, such as McKinstry Road and Chesterfield Avenue. Though these roadways are not formally designated as bicycle facilities, they are still fairly comfortable for cycling. Users will have the lowest quality experience on multi-lane roadways with high posted speeds and motor vehicle volumes (e.g., Trunk Road and the Trans-Canada Highway).

Duncan has the potential to become a truly inviting area for cyclists and pedestrians. Cyclists will benefit from expanding and enhancing the network of bicycle lanes on arterials and collectors and marking lower-stress designated shared roadways. Pedestrians will benefit from a network of complete facilities and intersection improvements designed to make crossing safer and more comfortable. These and other improvements can help to increase bikeway and walkway connectivity and access to commercial corridors, neighbourhood parks, greenways, and schools. A consistent approach between jurisdictions can create an active transportation network that is safer for all users.

9 Potential active transportation corridors were defined in consultation with the ATP SAC early in the planning process. These corridors typically provide connectivity within the study area as well as connections to neighbouring communities. The project team conducted significant field review of these corridors to inform the forthcoming infrastructure recommendations.

Page 87 of 247

The review of existing conditions (Chapter 2) and assessment of existing opportunities and constraints (Chapter 3) offers the framework for infrastructure, policy, and program recommendations and implementation strategies. The non-infrastructure recommendations of this Plan are designed for implementation within two years of adoption of the Plan. Existing and potential partners that may want a role in implementing community programs are described in Chapter 2. This Chapter concludes with recommended bicycle and pedestrian infrastructure and accompanying short-, medium- and long-term phasing recommendations.

Although Duncan, North Cowichan, and Cowichan Tribes have each supported policies that encourage active transportation and enhance its role in community planning, the policies could more comprehensively and explicitly support active transportation. The following policy recommendations build on the many existing policies that are supportive of transportation hierarchy. Recommended policies include a transportation hierarchy and a Complete Streets policy. The following priority policies should be implemented within the next 6 to 12 months: Complete Streets Policy Bicycle Parking Policy

Many cities in British Columbia and the United States have consciously adopted policies that prioritize bicycle and pedestrian access and investments over motor vehicle use, including Vancouver, British Columbia and Tacoma, Washington. This hierarchy places pedestrians, cyclists, and public transit in the forefront of transportation planning to receive funding and implementation priority. These principles are already embedded with North Cowichan’s and Duncan’s Official Community Plans. It is recommended that each municipality adopt an official policy that explicitly prioritizes pedestrians, cyclists, and transit connections over motor vehicle facilities to further emphasize and unify the existing supportive policies. Figure 25. Transportation Hierarchy

A standard of planning that prioritizes active transportation before other modes is best supported by strong policy. If active transportation is to become a priority, a Complete Streets policy that explicitly prioritizes funding for walking and bicycling infrastructure development should be adopted by each jurisdiction. The term Complete Streets means the process of planning, designing, building, and operating streets so they routinely and safely accommodate all modes of local and regional travel. Complete Streets principles aim to Page 88 of 247

provide a balanced transportation system for all modes of travel. The policy goal is to design and build streets that are safe, comfortable, and convenient for anyone to travel by foot, bicycle, transit, and motor vehicle regardless of age or ability. According to the National Complete Streets Coalition (www.completestreets.org), an ideal Policy is comprised of the following elements: Includes a vision for how and why the community wants to complete its streets Specifies that ‘all users’ includes pedestrians, bicyclists and transit passengers of all ages and abilities, as well as trucks, buses, and automobiles Applies to both new and retrofit projects, including design, planning, maintenance, and operations, for the entire right of way Makes any exceptions specific and sets a clear procedure that requires high-level approval of exceptions Encourages street connectivity and aims to create a comprehensive, integrated, connected network for all travel modes Is adoptable by all agencies to cover all roads Directs the use of the latest and best design criteria and guidelines while recognizing the need for flexibility in balancing user needs. Directs that complete streets solutions will complement the context of the community

Taking a Complete Streets approach to public policy and planning for a community improves quality of life. Duncan’s OCP Policy 7.2.3.2 recommends adoption of a Complete Streets Policy. The Municipality of North Cowichan’s Official Community Plan contains policy direction that establishes the basis of a Complete Streets approach. Policy 2.5.6.1 states “The municipality will design its transportation network to accommodate all modes of transportation (pedestrian, cyclist, transit, and auto) and enhance connectivity throughout the municipality,” with Section A further clarifying that “the movement of people by foot, bicycle and public transit will be given equal priority and attention with automobile transportation in policy, design, and capital investment decision-making.” Though not specifically described as a Complete Streets policy, the current policies are supportive of the same concepts. Based on recommendations provided by the U.S. National Complete Streets Coalition, sample language for a comprehensive completes streets policy is provided below. If the language is not formally adopted as a complete policy, selected recommendations could be adopted individually.

“Complete Streets is an on-going and comprehensive planning, design, construction and operations process with a long-range perspective aimed at improving safety, usability and quality of life. Duncan, North Cowichan, and Cowichan Tribes seek to plan and program rights-of-way that fully integrate the needs of street users of all ages, abilities, and modes including cyclists, pedestrians, transit users, commercial vehicles, emergency service vehicles, and passenger vehicles. Figure 25. Complete Streets serve all types To achieve a roadway network that is safe, comfortable, of users.

Page 89 of 247

and attractive for all users a complete streets policy has been developed that addresses the following topics: Planning Design Finance Construction Operations Exceptions Page 90 of 247

The following steps form the basis of a solid complete streets strategy as well as the basis for implementation of this Plan:

1. Regularly discuss current roadway projects to provide seamless transitions between existing facilities.

2. Adopt the Transportation Hierarchy as a common basis for transportation planning.

3. Reference the Cowichan Valley Transit Future Plan when conducting corridor studies to give explicit consideration to transit use.

4. Where appropriate ask BC Transit, Cowichan Valley Regional District (CVRD), the BC Ministry of Transportation and Infrastructure, and other project partners to review alternatives of corridor studies.

5. Review and provide comment on the Transportation Plan contained in member jurisdictions’ Official Community Plans (OCPs) or other relevant plans.

6. Coordinate trail development with CVRD to prioritize trail segments that provide connectivity to the regional system.

7. Sign a memorandum of understanding (MOU) or other document formalizing the intention to cooperatively plan and prioritize active transportation investments in the Cowichan Valley.

1. When appropriate, consider roadway design that slows motor vehicles and/or limits access so as to provide greater safety for cyclists, pedestrians, and motorists (e.g., lane narrowing or the reduction of lanes; reduction of access etc.).

2. Adopt by a MOU consistent design principles for cyclists and pedestrians as recommended in this Plan. Periodically update these design guidelines based on best practices in British Columbia and elsewhere.

3. Evaluate existing and potential on-road bicycle use in all repaving and re-striping projects (i.e. striping of bicycle lanes, wide curb lanes, paving of roadway shoulders, or widening of curb lanes) as well as new roadway construction and reconstruction projects.

4. Evaluate the effectiveness of narrowing pedestrian crossing distances at intersections where high motor vehicle counts and high pedestrian counts are expected. Narrowing can be accomplished with pedestrian refuge islands or curb extensions.

5. Provide appropriate bicycle accommodation on and along all arterial and collector streets.

6. Use pedestrian-scale design adjacent to sidewalks and other pedestrian facilities (e.g., pedestrian scale lighting, application of buffers between roadways and sidewalks or shared use paths, application of street furniture etc.).

7. Maintain the function of existing freight corridors, such as the Trans-Canada Highway, but evaluate design treatments to improve function of the corridor for cyclists and pedestrians.

8. Provide pedestrian accommodation in the form of sidewalks or shared-use paths adjacent to all arterial and collector streets.

Page 91 of 247

9. Retrofit sidewalks and curbs with pedestrian ramps as expeditiously as possible so that all pedestrians are served at the highest possible levels of service.

10. Develop a Complete Streets checklist to guide the development of transportation projects.10

11. Recognize the role that street trees and other urban design elements, play creating a safe and attractive environment for active transportation and include them in retrofit and urban design projects and roadway reconstruction or redesign projects, whenever possible. Many design elements, like pedestrian scale lighting, are context specific, but street trees can be used in almost any roadway context.

1. Include active transportation as a line item in each jurisdiction’s operational and capital budget Construction 1. Provide alternate routes for cyclists and pedestrians during construction, reconstruction, and repair of streets. Develop standards to maintain pedestrian and cyclist access during construction activities.

1. Time traffic signals to provide adequate/comfortable pedestrian and cyclist crossing time.

2. In pedestrian areas, provide audible and countdown signal heads. Consider exclusive pedestrian timing or leading pedestrian intervals where pedestrian crossing volumes are sufficiently high. Set a goal of establishing a warrant system or hierarchy.

3. Provide bicycle signal detection at all actuated signals along bikeways and major roads typically used as cycling routes.

4. Explore development of a coordinated maintenance schedule or program to address bikeway, sidewalk, and shared use path maintenance needs.

5. Develop a maintenance schedule and strategy that is consistent across jurisdictions.

6. Establish performance metrics to track the implementation of this policy and report regularly (e.g., annually) via a website or other publically available format. Sample metrics include: a. Kilometres of bikeways, shared use paths, and sidewalks in relation to kilometres of roadway b. Reduced collisions involving cyclists or pedestrians c. Improvements to air quality d. Reduced transportation system maintenance costs e. Increased numbers of people walking and cycling (counted annually) f. Increased percent of traffic signals with countdown signalization and/or bicycle detection g. Increased transit boardings, number of transit passengers who bring bicycles

10 A sample checklist from the Metropolitan Transportation Commission in the San Francisco, CA area can be found here: http://www.mtc.ca.gov/planning/bicyclespedestrians/Routine_Accommodation_checklist_FINAL.pdf Page 92 of 247

Not every street can be ideal for every traveler. However, it is still important to provide basic, safe, and direct access for users regardless of the design strategy used. Exceptions to the Complete Streets policy should be made, by each appropriate jurisdiction where: 1. A suitable or more desirable alternative is available within a reasonable distance based on public and staff input. (General acceptable total distances between facilities: pedestrians 0.4 kilometres; bicyclists 0.8 kilometres.)

2. The cost of accommodation would be excessively disproportionate to the need or probable use. (Note: Excessively disproportionate is sometimes defined as exceeding 20% of the cost of the larger transportation project.)

3. There is public consensus that the accommodation is unwanted. Evidence of this should be well documented and defensible.

Bicycle parking (Figure 26) and other end of trip facilities are critical to a decision about whether to bicycle to a destination. Research has shown that a number of factors influence the use of bicycle parking, including type, quantity, proximity to destinations, and security. The following actions are recommended to enhance end-of-trip facilities. Continue and expand the adoption of bicycle parking codes requiring installation of bicycle parking tied to land use. Duncan OCP Policy 7.2.3.4 supports installation of secure parking, storage and shower facilities. Exemplary Development Permit Area (DPA) guidelines, such as those outlined in zoning code for Chemainus Artisan Village, provide a starting place for code development in other DPAs. A sample bicycle parking requirement table is included (see Table 4).

Monitor occupancy of short-term bicycle racks. Add bicycle parking if racks are consistently over Figure 26. Bicycle parking is part of the 80% occupied, or if nearby residents or business active transportation network. owners request additional parking.

Just as motor vehicle trips vary in purpose and duration, so too do bicycle trips. Because of the varied nature of bicycle trips, different types of bicycle parking should be provided to accommodate these needs. These needs can be met by providing both short-term and long-term parking. The Association of Pedestrian and Bicycle Professionals addresses the distinction between short/long-term parking in the Bicycle Parking Guide, 2nd Edition, 2010) Table 4 provides a summary.

Page 93 of 247

Table 4. Criteria for short-term and long-term bicycle parking11

Parking Duration Less than two hours More than two hours Fixture Type Simple bicycle racks Lockers, racks in secured area Weather Protection Unsheltered Sheltered or enclosed Secured, active surveillance Security Unsecured, passive surveillance “Individual-secure” such as bicycle lockers “Shared-secure” such as bicycle room or cage

Valet bicycle parking Paid area of transit station Typical land uses Commercial or retail, medical/healthcare, Residential, workplace, transit parks and recreation areas, community centers

Providing the options for short-term and long-term bicycle parking is important to bicyclists. Communities use different metrics for assigning appropriate levels of bicycle parking, including: Unit count Percentage of building square footage Building occupancy Percentage car parking The APBP Guidelines recommend decoupling bike parking supply from motor vehicle parking supply. The reason for this is that motor vehicle parking supply is not necessarily a good measure of the number of cyclists who would be expected to travel to a particular destination, especially in densely urbanized areas or where multiple travel options exist. The APBP Bicycle Parking Guide provides two groups of recommendations, one standard set and a higher level for “Urbanized or High Mode Share Areas.” Because of the characteristics of the Duncan area, Table 5 does not reflect the higher bicycle parking rates from the Bicycle Parking Guide, which are approximately 20 percent higher and are recommended as a starting point for communities with higher levels of bicycling use. The values in Table 5 may be used as a starting point for developing a bicycle parking code requirements. A count or assessment of current bicycle parking use and latent demand (e.g., bicycles secured to sign poles or other sidewalk furniture) should be completed in conjunction with development of code requirements.

11 Association of Pedestrian and Bicycle Professionals (APBP) Bicycle Parking Guide, 2010. Page 10. Page 94 of 247

Table 5. Sample Bicycle Parking Requirements

Recreational/Civic Non-assembly cultural (library, government 1 sp./930 sq. m. (2 min) 1 sp./10 employees (2 min) buildings, etc.) Assembly cultural (church, theater, park, Spaces for 2% maximum 1 sp./20 employees (2 min) etc.) daily attendance

1 sp./1,860 sq. m. ( 2 1 sp./20 employees or 1 sp./6500 sq. Hospital min.) m., whichever is greater ( 2 min.)

Schools

1 sp./20 students (2 Kindergarten/Elementary Schools 1 sp./10 employees (2 min) min)

1 sp./20 students (2 1 sp./10 employees + 1 sp./20 Jr. High/High School min) students (2 min)

1 sp./10 employees + 1 sp./10 1 sp./10 students (2 Colleges/Universities students; or 1 sp./1860 sq. m., min) whichever is greater Residential Single Family No spaces required No spaces required Multifamily Residential With private garage for each unit .05 sp./bedroom (2 min) No spaces required .05 sp./bedroom (2 Without private garage for each unit .5 sp./bedroom (2 min) min.) .05 sp./bedroom (2 Senior Housing .5 sp./bedroom (2 min) min.) Commercial/Other 1 sp./1860 sq. m. (2 Offices 1 sp./930 sq. m. (2 min) min) Retail (furniture, appliances, hardware, 1 sp./465 sq. m. (2 min) 1 sp./1115 sq. m. (2 min) etc.) Retail (grocery, convenience, personal) 1 sp./185 sq. m. (2 min) 1 sp./1115 sq. m. (2 min.) Determined at discretion Industrial/Manufacturing of Planning Director 1 sp./1394 sq. m. (2 min) (Suggested 2 min) Spaces for 1.5% of a.m. Spaces for 5% projected a.m. peak Bus terminals/stations peak period ridership period daily ridership .

Page 95 of 247

Consistent with the Cowichan Valley Transit Future Plan, BC Transit will enhance transit service in the Duncan area over the coming years by adding additional capacity, increasing direct connections between communities, and providing service for elderly, youth, and student populations. These modifications will be necessary if the community is going to significantly increase active transportation’s mode share to accommodate new residents and to have capacity for the shifting demographics that anticipate a higher proportion of elderly residents. Additional policy strategies will improve the integration of transit use with cycling and walking. Jurisdictional policies Figure 27. Transit connections are critical that support efficient transit systems and that improve to the last kilometre of travel. access to transit can dramatically increase the viability of walking and cycling as transportation options and reduce traffic congestion. In addition, improved transit can reduce barriers to active transportation by providing options to increase trip distance, bypass barriers created by infrastructure (e.g., highways), and serving people with mobility impairments. Based on existing conditions inventory and existing service, recommended strategies to support increased transit use include the following: Work with CVRD to improve transit accessibility and legibility: o Provide route and schedule information at each transit stop o When possible increase frequency and expand evening service o Provide bicycle parking in proximity to transit stations to facilitate multi-modal trips o Provide amenities to increase the comfort of wait time at transit stops, including shelter, seating, and trash receptacles o Provide safe roadway crossing opportunities in proximity to transit stops o Provide safe access to transit vehicles for the elderly and physically disabled12 o Prioritize upgrades (e.g., shelters and benches) at transit stops near destinations used by youth, students, and the elderly, and stops that receive heavy use. o Increase the number of pedestrians and cyclists that are within a stop’s service area by increasing land use density and supporting transit oriented development. Support land use policies that provide a grid of connections and minimize cul-de-sacs. Where cul- de-sacs do exist, support development of pedestrian accessways to reduce the need for out-of-direction travel. Support the continued practice of providing bicycle racks on buses to support the ‘last kilometre’ of the trip. Monitor the system through anecdotal evidence or formal surveys to ensure adequate match between supply and demand.

12 In the United States, the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) provides guidelines for accessibility to and at transit stops. Two of its minimum standards are the provision of 1.2 metre wide pathways around the bus stop or shelter and a pathway between the bus and the waiting area (i.e. across the boulevard). Page 96 of 247

Work with CVRD to investigate methods to provide additional capacity to carry bicycles on commuter buses heading to Victoria.

Research and experience have demonstrated that program work is essential to achieving modal shift to walking and cycling. The following programmatic recommendations are based upon the existing conditions review and assessment and are intended to complement proposed policy and infrastructure improvements. The programs fall within the following broad categories of program types: Encouragement and Education Enforcement Evaluation/Institutional

While all non-infrastructure recommendations are intended for short-term implementation, some programs will likely have the highest impact and the lowest cost. The following priority programs, which are described within this section, should be implemented within the next 12 to 24 months: Farmer’s Market Outreach Bicycle Skills Training Comprehensive Communication Active and Safe Routes to School Senior Strolls Walking Program and Safety Education Formal Decision-Making Process (convene an Active Transportation Committee) Driver Awareness Campaign

The well-attended Duncan Farmer’s Market in the Square is an ideal way to reach large numbers of residents in a casual and friendly setting. For Bike Month (June), a cycling outreach station should be set up to offer free safety checks and basic bicycle tune-ups, offer flat repair training, distribute the Bike Sense booklet, and share information about the goals and progress of the ATP. This could be undertaken in partnership with Cycle Cowichan and/or local bike shops. If the first year’s program is considered successful, it could be expanded in the future to cover more than one month and/or to offer more services (such as valet bike parking, guided rides, maps, and brochures, etc.).

While most people learn to ride a bicycle, the vast majority do not receive any training on roadway cycling. There is a great need to increase knowledge of both cyclist and motorist rights and responsibilities, as well as training cyclists on specific cycle handling skills that will benefit them as they negotiate roadways with motor vehicles.

Page 97 of 247

It is recommended that training be provided using existing curricula. One possible offering is the CAN- Bike program (http://www.canbike.net/cca_pages/index.htm), offered through the Canadian Cycling Association with support from Transport Canada. CAN-Bike has ready-to-offer courses for children as well as beginning and advanced adult cyclists. Courses can be offered by working with a nearby trainer (e.g., in partnership with Bike to Work Victoria), or it may make sense for Cycle Cowichan, local bike shops, or another organization to select one or more people to be trained as local instructors.

Many residents do not know where to find information about walking and cycling, including laws, events, maps, tips, and biking groups. Duncan, North Cowichan, and Cowichan Tribes should collaborate on a “one stops shopping” website aimed at pedestrians and bicyclists. The website should contain links to local community groups, the ATP document and periodic updates about Plan implementation, simple evaluation metrics tracking community progress towards infrastructure implementation, information about current projects and how to get involved (e.g., public meetings and comment periods). Information should be made available in hard copy format at social agencies and other public locations. Other links can include how to order the Bike Sense booklet, local jurisdictions and staff contacts, information about walking and cycling events (e.g., rides, classes, volunteer opportunities), and (if desired) a blog or other social media portal. For physical fitness, improved health, and active communities, a social marketing campaign similar to, or in conjunction with, the Green Communities Canada iCAN walk initiative may be appropriate. A one-stop bike website will not be difficult to set up, but it will only be successful if the site is both easy to use and updated regularly. The site contents should be reviewed at least quarterly for accuracy. Figure28. ASRTS pilot programs can be used to model successful programs. Building on the national and international resources available, a pilot ASRTS program should be developed for one elementary school in the Duncan region (Figure 28). The pilot should follow the national ASRTS School Travel Planning protocol (http://saferoutestoschool.ca/), and will result in a “Five E’s” (Engineering, Education, Encouragement, Enforcement, and Evaluation) plan for the school. An ASRTS Working Group can build on that experience to expand the program to other schools. The program should be coordinated with efforts already underway such as talks on bicycle and pedestrian safety conducted by Crime Prevention Unit officers. A trained ASRTS facilitator should be engaged; one way to accomplish that may be to partner with Hub for Action on School Transportation Emissions (HASTE - http://www.hastebc.org/). Other initial ASRTS actions that may be considered: Participating in International Walk to School Day (http://www.saferoutestoschool.ca/registration/registration/) Offering youth bicycle skills training through the Kids-CAN program (see “Bicycle Skills Training,” above)

Page 98 of 247

Offering an after-school walking and/or bicycling club for youth

Many seniors experience limitations in mobility as they age, and are often left out of recreation programs (Figure 29). A Senior Strolls walking program will help seniors maintain physical fitness, improve health, and enjoy opportunities for social interaction. Senior Strolls should be short, easy, and organized group walks hosted on a regular basis (weekly or biweekly) during pleasant weather months. Walks may originate at Volunteer Cowichan and/or the Valley Seniors Organization of Duncan. Walks can have different themes to keep participants interested (e.g., heritage homes tour, public art tour, waterwise gardens walk), or could have a few set routes and focus instead on community and wellness. Walks could provide an opportunity for ongoing safety education.

Figure 29. Senior strolls can help seniors remain active.

Additional actions to complement the current activities of the RCMP will continue to make trails and roadways in the Duncan area safer and enhance the pedestrian and cycling environments. Recommendations include creating a formal relationship between the RCMP and municipal staff and implementing enforcement actions that have proven effective in other communities throughout North America (Figure 30). Transportation/public works departments’ and law enforcement agencies’ standard operating procedures have several differences that are important to note despite their common goal of increased road user safety. Transportation and public works employees are expected to consider and respond to residents’ complaints and recommendations and involve the public in decision-making. The success of a transportation project and its project manager’s Figure 30. Partnerships with law performance is often measured by a collaborative stakeholder enforcement make roadways safer for all involvement process that includes other agencies as well as the users. public, and that results in public support for (or lack of public opposition to) a project. Transportation professionals also deal

Page 99 of 247

with projects that are expected to stretch out for years between visioning and completion. Their work is typically policy- or standards- based. By comparison, law enforcement work is not primarily driven by public input or an expectation of a high level of citizen engagement. On a day-to-day basis, law enforcement professionals primarily react to field incidents or unique complaints. Law enforcement staff’s successful performance is often measured by quantitative enforcement targets and by the ability to prevent incidents from escalating. Their work is typically based upon successful interpretation of the law as it relates to public safety. However, there are also similarities between transportation agencies and law enforcement agencies. Both are committed to the goal of improving the health and safety of residents while they travel throughout the city. Both agencies set proactive priorities that can be changed on short notice by elected officials in response to a crisis that results in community outcry (such as a tragic road crash). Finally, both transportation and law enforcement professionals have unique skills and knowledge that can serve the interest of improving road safety for all residents. Actions that can be taken to foster and strengthen the relationship between public works and law enforcement representatives include: Identify the best internal advocates for walking and bicycling in both agencies (the likeliest candidate is a cyclist) regardless of his/her official role. Regularly ask the established contact(s) for advice and input on enforcement and public safety issues.

Collaborate on grant applications. Ideally, ideas for grant requests will come out of shared issue identification and ideas for solutions. It may also be effective to request that the RCMP provide letters of support.

Find opportunities to collaborate on small projects that generate positive community feedback (e.g., requesting law enforcement presence at International Walk-to-School Day events in October). The experience gained, and the relationships formed, in working together on short term small efforts will form the basis for longer-term efforts that may require more intensive collaboration and tackling potentially controversial issues together. One potential partnership opportunity is the Citizens on Patrol (COPS) program, which operates in British Columbia on Friday and Saturday nights. Exemplary programs exist in the BC lower mainland.

Upon understanding enforcement priorities, identify current agency efforts that already support cyclist safety, and create private and public opportunities for appreciation. Establish connections between enforcement activities and overall cycling or walking safety. For example, impaired driving and speed enforcement directly tackle safety issues that endanger cyclists, even though that is not likely to be a primary reason for making it an enforcement priority.

The following recommendations for enforcement activities should be a high priority because of their impact on cycling and pedestrian safety. Creating a strong relationship between the RCMP and bicycling/walking community will aid in development and implementation of these programs. Page 100 of 247

Speeding vehicles endanger all road users, including pedestrians. High-speed driving results in more frequent collisions and collisions that are more likely to result in serious injury or death. Targeted speed enforcement activities are a proven way to improve road safety and make walking and cycling more appealing.

Law enforcement officials should enforce speeds near schools, in downtown, at entrances to key destinations like the Cowichan Sportsplex, and at locations that are known to have speeding problems. Locations can be identified by the Safety Committee, through volunteer speed watches and consideration of resident complaints. These campaigns are ideally used for an Active and Safe Routes to School Program (discussed in Section 4.6); many towns hold an annual “Back to School Blitz” to enforce speed limits in school zones.

As part of ongoing enforcement against speeding, the RCMP should also continue to utilize the speed reader board request program that exists through Community Policing. The boards should be mounted temporarily (e.g., for two weeks) and then be moved to another location to keep motorists from becoming inured to the speed reader board effect.

Crosswalk enforcement actions (sometimes known as “pedestrian stings”) raise public awareness about the legal obligation of motorists to stop for pedestrians at crosswalks. While crosswalk enforcement actions do result in tickets being distributed, the greater impact comes through media publicity of the event to reinforce the importance of obeying pedestrian crossing laws. RCMP should conduct regular crosswalk enforcement actions. Most crosswalk enforcement sites are selected because they have been identified as locations where pedestrians have trouble crossing, and/or where a large volume of pedestrians (especially vulnerable pedestrians such as children and seniors) is expected. High-crash locations may also be candidates for enforcement actions. If locations near schools are selected, the best timing for an enforcement action is the back-to-school window just after school has begun for the year. Locations should be selected by the RCMP in consultation with the Safety Committee. Any complaints from the public about problem crossing locations should be considered. School officials will also have valuable input about school crossing locations that would benefit from targeted enforcement. Once locations have been determined, the RCMP should prepare by marking the safe stopping distance with cones. Then plainclothes police officers or trained volunteer decoys attempt to cross at corners and marked mid- block crossings just before a vehicle passes the cone. (Decoys may also be notable community members such as the mayor or a well-known business leader to increase media interest in the event.) If motorists fail to yield to the pedestrian in a crosswalk, a second police officer issues a warning or a ticket at the officer’s discretion. It is recommended that the enforcement action be recorded on video to support issued violations should a motorist challenge the ticket.

Page 101 of 247

In order to facilitate coordination and momentum on pedestrian and cycling issues, Duncan, North Cowichan and Cowichan Tribes should convene an Active Transportation Committee consisting of municipal staff (planners, engineers and other staff tasked with working on these issues), community, and staff from partner agencies (such as CVRD and the MOTI). The group should meet quarterly following completion of the ATP with the goal of working energetically towards implementing the plan recommendations and developing standardized design guidance and implementation practices. Logistical support from CVRD would enhance coordination with regional transportation planning, projects, and issues. Appointments to the committee should be made by the mayor or other high-level decision maker and attendance should become a part of each person’s job description. Citizen or other public participation should be considered; these seats could be designated as advisory only, depending on the final committee format. Major task areas include: Implementing the ATP Determining the composition and decision making structure of the committee Developing standardized design guidance and implementation practice Leveraging funding and seeking new funding sources Working together on cross-jurisdictional efforts (such as Active and Safe Routes to School and Bicycle Skills Training) and existing committees such as MACDI and Advisory Committee on Seniors Issues Furthering the development of a formal working agreement or memorandum of understanding among Duncan, North Cowichan and the Cowichan Tribes for plan implementation

A successful advisory group will typically include no more than 12 members and should include the representation recommended in Table 6.

Table 6. Recommended ATC Committee Representation

A community member from Duncan, North Cowichan A planner and engineer from each jurisdiction with an interest in and Cowichan Tribes bicycle and pedestrian issues A member with specific interests and expertise in public CVRD Parks director or designee health and fitness issues A community member or advocate with knowledge of CVRD Transit representative or designee universal design Representatives of related advocacy groups such as MOTI Area Manager or other designee Advisory Committee on Senior’s Issues or Cycle Cowichan Public members of environmental, climate action, or Law enforcement representative (e.g., RCMP) related committees or advocates Planner or engineer from each jurisdiction supporting environmental or climate action committees Page 102 of 247

These additional recommendations are general in nature and can help improve coordination and communication around active transportation.

A unified approach to system design can increase staff efficiency and create a system that is attractive and safe for all users. Opportunities for shared training and communication between staff should occur on a quarterly basis or more frequently as opportunities arise.

A more comprehensive approach to project development, prioritization, and funding could contribute to successful grant awards and bicycle/pedestrian network development. For example, an implementation checklist can provide staff step-by-step guidance on project implementation. An example is referenced in the Complete Streets section.

Develop simple performance measures that can be used to track community progress towards infrastructure implementation and report the results annually. Recommended metrics are embedded within the Complete Streets recommendations.

Recommendations for bicycle and pedestrian facilities were developed to help make the Duncan area a place that is increasingly friendly for active transportation. To realize this vision, project recommendations were developed with the following criteria in mind: Improving safety Providing Safe Routes to School Providing Access to Community Destinations Completing Streets Ease of Implementation Increasing Regional/Local Connectivity Map 12 (page 4-87) shows the recommended pedestrian improvements. Consisting largely of sidewalk infill, these improvements complement the proposed bicycling network and provide dedicated space for pedestrian travel. These improvements include approximately 20 kilometres of sidewalk infill or construction. Additionally, crossing improvements, new signals, or signal timing studies are recommended at 9 intersections. Pedestrian improvements are described in Tables 10-11 (page 4-59). This plan recommends a robust network of on-street bicycle facilities and trails that follow the active transportation corridors agreed on during the project kickoff meeting. Recommended facilities include bike lanes, cycle tracks, shared lane markings, and side paths and trails. The recommendations shown on Map 13 (page 4-89) depict a continuous on-street bikeway network and complementary trail network and include

Page 103 of 247

connections to CVRD’s proposed regional trail network (e.g., along the E&N Rail Corridor and Trans-Canada Highway).13 The bicycle facility recommendations are summarized in Table 7 (page 4-54), shown on Map 13 (page 4-89), and described in detail in Table 12 (page 4-60). Recommendations are listed by roadway name and recommended facility type. Some recommendations will require greater effort to implement than others (e.g., shared lane markings on Cairnsmore St vs. a cycle track on the Trans-Canada Highway).

Table 7. Summary of Bicycle Facility Recommendations Proposed Facility Km Bike Lane 12 Cycle Track 5 Shared Lane Marking 73 Shoulder Bikeway 17 Trail 1

Recommendations for area-wide efforts are non-location-specific improvements that would improve conditions for bicycling and walking throughout the city.

Duncan and North Cowichan can improve detection of bicycles and use of traffic signals by bicyclists through the following actions: Work with cyclists to develop a list of intersections along frequently used routes where existing signals can be modified to detect cyclists better at a relatively low cost. Prioritize these locations for signal improvements. Ensure that all new signals provide a means of cyclist activation. Consider adjusting signal timing plans to provide adequate crossing time at intersections on the designated bicycle network. Use pavement markings to identify the most sensitive spots of in-pavement loop detectors.

Duncan, Cowichan Tribes and North Cowichan should develop a signing program with the specific uniform standards. The signing program can be implemented in several phases to make use of available funding and construction opportunities. Signs should be integrated with the standards developed by CVRD for use on regional trails. Additional information on wayfinding signs is included in the design guide.

13 For more information on proposed regional trails and implementation strategies see the 2007 Cowichan Valley Regional District Regional Parks & Trails Master Plan. Page 104 of 247

During public involvement many residents mentioned the desire to enhance pedestrian accessibility throughout the Duncan area by installing or improving curb let downs, increasing the length of the pedestrian crossing phase at key intersections, the removal of obstructions to cyclists and pedestrians (clear pathways), surfacing trails with materials that permit easy access for people using wheelchairs or other mobility devices, and installing pedestrian countdown timers at signalized intersections. Duncan, North Cowichan, and Cowichan Tribes should consider identifying standards of implementation and a regular funding source for small scale pedestrian improvements, maintaining a list of requested improvements, and working with the Active Transportation Committee and other relevant advisory or municipal representatives to prioritize and respond to citizen requests. Installation of APS in key locations could also benefit visually impaired or blind pedestrians. APS signals are used in conjunction with standard pedestrian activated traffic signals and emit distinct tones that assist people of all ages crossing streets at designated intersections and could benefit Duncan area pedestrians. However, an audible signal does not and cannot assure pedestrians that no potential traffic conflicts will occur. In particular, conflicts may occur if: A motor vehicle is clearing the intersection when the signal turns on A motor vehicle fails to yield A motorist stops to make a right turn and watches traffic on the left and fails to notice a pedestrian on the right A motor vehicle may have the right or left turn signal phase as a pedestrian Installation of an APS should be considered if the location is suitable and need is demonstrated. Several municipalities have developed checklists to prioritize installation of APS signals throughout the community including Portland, Oregon and the City of San Diego14. These lists represent a good starting point for development of a similar checklist for Duncan, North Cowican, and Cowichan Tribes.

As discussed previously a cycle track is recommended as a long-term and aspirational retrofit for the Trans- Canada Highway. This facility would provide the greatest amount of separation between bicyclists and motor vehicles, but retrofitting a cycle track in this constrained corridor could require significant acquisition of right- of-way or reconfiguring the existing roadway. A short-term strategy to improving conditions within this corridor would prioritize improvements along other north-south corridors and roadways that cross the Trans-Canada Highway and additional short-term recommendations from the 2005 Trans-Canada Highway Corridor Management Plan. Canada Avenue or Duncan Street are recommended as a priority north-south corridor or other north-south streets that currently do not provide through connections (e.g., Festubert Street or Bundock Avenue). Recommended intersection treatments include development of bicycle facilities on James Street and Coronation Avenue, review of crossing times to ensure that cyclists and pedestrians are detected at signals and that they have adequate crossing time, installation of curb bulbs to reduce crossing distances when possible, and installation of advance stop bars to improve bicycle and pedestrian visibility.

14 FHWA. Accessible Pedestrian Signals: Synthesis and Guide to Best Practice. 2003. Web.

Page 105 of 247

Many intersections and trails in the study area could benefit from pedestrian-scale lighting to 1) Increase visibility at and along roadways and 2) provide safety and comfort along trail. Standards and guidance should be developed to meet the needs of trail users, especially along heavily used trails, while also considering the potential impact on wildlife. Opportunities may exist to provide solar lighting and/or work with BC Hydro during implementation.

There are a number of high-crash locations in the Duncan area that warrant further study to determine the best methods to improve pedestrian and cycling safety. An area of particular focus should be on pedestrians who use mobility devices or who may have other special needs (e.g., additional time at intersection crossings). Funding for the following intersection studies should be prioritized. Duncan, North Cowichan, and Cowichan Tribes should work with ICBC, MOTI, and other relevant stakeholders to identify factors that contribute to crashes and develop solutions that can be implemented at these intersections and throughout the area. High priority intersections include: Trans-Canada Highway and Trunk Road Cowichan Way and Trans-Canada Highway Festubert Street, Trunk Road, and the Mall Access Marchmont Road, McKinstry Road and Trunk Road

The recommended bicycle, sidewalk, trail and intersection improvements represent the efforts of Duncan, North Cowichan, and Cowichan Tribes to create a comprehensive and well-connected active transportation network that serves users of all ages and abilities. The proposed network is comprised of a long list of projects and while all projects represent important steps for improving the active transportation environment, prioritizing projects will maximize use of limited financial and staff resources. Project priorities were developed based on staff feedback and the criteria listed in Table 8 (below) and are described on Maps 12 and 13 (pages 4-87 and 4-89) and in Tables 10-12 (page 4-59). It is recommended that short-term projects be constructed first, but this project list should also be considered a living document and staff should take an opportunistic approach to facility construction that responds to new sources of funding, grant opportunities, and other opportunities that may arise. Medium- and longer-term projects are also important, and may be implemented at any point in time as part of a development or public works project, or as additional funding becomes available. Priority project lists should be revisited occasionally to ensure that the identified priorities still align with community needs and desires. Page 106 of 247

Table 8. Project Prioritization Criteria

Score each project based on collision history. Projects receive a higher score if they improve a location that has had a high number of collisions. Projects that upgrade an obsolete (potentially Projects will receive a score of 4 if a Improves Safety hazardous) design receive a higher score. crash occurred within the project extent. Both Score each project based on its Projects within a half-kilometre of a Provides Active and proximity to a school. Projects receive a school receive 2 points, projects within Safe Routes to higher score if they are located closer to one-quarter of a kilometre of a school School a school. receive 4 points. Both Score each project based on its proximity Projects within a half-kilometre of a to commercial areas, parks, and civic point of interest receive 2 points, Provides Access to areas. Projects receive a higher score if projects within one-quarter of a Community they are located closer to community kilometre of a point of interest receive 4 Destinations destinations. points. Both Score each project based on roadway Projects will receive 4 points if they are type. Projects receive a higher score if located on a highway, 3 points if they are they are located on an arterial, lower if located on arterials, 2 points if they are they are located on a residential located on collector roads, and 1 point if Roadway Type roadway. they are pathways or local roads. Both High Ease (4 points) projects are bicycle boulevards and sidewalks in public right of way or enhanced crossing. Medium Ease (2 points) projects are modifications to existing paths, bicycle lanes that require minimal lane modification, and sidewalks on privately Score each project based on the owned or ministry owned property, or complexity of the project. Projects with signal timing adjustment. significant feasibility analysis, design, or Low Ease (0 points) projects are paths environmental requirements receive a requiring right-of-way negotiation or lower score. Projects that require acquisition, sidewalks along multiple completion of another project before private properties, bicycle lanes or cycle Ease of they can be implemented receive lower tracks requiring significant roadway Implementation scores. reconfiguration, or new signal. Both Score each project based on connectivity to local and regional routes. Projects that Projects receive 4 points if they are part connect to an existing bike project in a of the CVRD bikeway network, and 2 Increases neighbouring community or identified as points if they connect to neighboring Regional/Local part of the CVRD regional trail network communities' existing or planned Connectivity receive a higher score. bikeways. Bike Only

Projects receive 4 points if they were mentioned more than five times, 3 points Projects receive points if they were if they were mentioned two to four times Community Support mentioned during the planning process. and 1 point if they were mentioned once. Both

For the process of project prioritization within each tier and the associated apportionment of funding, it may be desirable for municipalities to undertake a second prioritization exercise utilizing criteria that are closely focused on the details of project implementation. This process would enable staff to objectively rank the ease and benefits of project implementation. Sample recommended criteria are presented in Table 9 (page 4-59).

Page 107 of 247

Table 9. Potential Secondary Project Ranking Criteria

2 More than half of funding is already secured Budget Need 1 Less than half of funding is already secured

3 Project expected to receive exemption or exclusion (local or provincial funding) Expected Environmental 2 Project expected to receive exemption or exclusion (federal funding) Process or Discretionary 1 Project expected to require minor environmental/discretionary review Funding 0 Project expected to require significant environmental/discretionary review

Project requires departmental coordination with minimal involvement from 3 other agencies Jurisdictional Complexity 2 Project requires coordination with 2 agencies 1 Project requires coordination with 3 or more agencies

2 Initiating project now will secure 80% or more of the funds Potential to Leverage Other Funding 1 Initiating project now will secure less than 80 % of the funds

Policy Directive 1 Project specified by policy

Duncan, North Cowichan, and Cowichan Tribes should undertake the development of wayfinding signage as a short term priority for the bicycling network. Wayfinding signing is a low cost strategy that can significantly improve the ability of both residents and visitors to navigate local roadways already suited to bicycle travel, existing pathways, and new on-street bikeway improvements. Wayfinding also increases the visibility of cycling in the Duncan area and alerts all roadway users to the presence of bicyclists in the system.

The pedestrian projects recommended for preliminary implementation include studies to evaluate crossing times. Based on public comments that signals along the Trans-Canada Highway consistently do not allow enough time for a pedestrian to comfortably cross the roadway, it is recommended that Duncan and North Cowichan staff work with MOTI to review the existing signal timing plans. Additional short-term infrastructure improvement recommendations are shown in Table 11 (page 4-59) and shown on Map 12 (page 4-87).

In the near term, within one to two budget cycles, Duncan, Cowichan Tribes, and North Cowichan should each focus on one to two projects that will provide significant enhancements to bicycling connectivity and organizational capacity for partnership among the municipalities. Projects recommended for priority implementation include Government Street, Canada Avenue in Duncan, and the future Dike Trail in North Cowichan. Page 108 of 247

In addition to these two priority projects, other short-term projects are recommended to improve conditions for cyclists. Table 12 (page 4-60) shows short-, medium-, and long-term bicycle system recommendations. Recommended phasing is shown on Map 13 (page 4-89).

Table 10. Recommended Sidewalk Facilities and Prioritization Pro j. Tie Roadway Lengt Improvem No. r Name Extent h ent Type Jurisdiction 3 1 Duncan St Trunk Rd to North Cowichan border 821 Infill Duncan 11 1 Duncan St Duncan border to Beverly St 962 Infill North Cowichan Cowichan Tribes and 9 1 Lakes Rd North of North Cowichan border 291 Infill Duncan 12 1 Lakes Rd Cowichan Sportsplex to Beverly St 280 Widening North Cowichan 14 2 Lakes Rd North Cowichan border to Trunk Road 160 Infill Duncan Chesterfield Coronation Avenue to North Cowichan 2 2 Ave border 408 Infill Duncan Chesterfield Duncan border to Cowichan Sportsplex 10 2 Ave driveway 910 Infill North Cowichan 4 2 Evans St Jubilee St to Tyee St 146 Infill Duncan 5 2 Government St Cairnsmore St to Gibbins Rd 147 Widening Duncan Trans-Canada 13 3 Hwy James St to Beverly St 723 Widening North Cowichan 1 3 Cowichan Way E & N Railway to Central Rd 566 Infill Cowichan Tribes 6 3 Jubilee St Evans St to 2nd St 206 Widening Duncan 7 3 Jubilee St Cavell St to White Rd 436 Infill Duncan 8 3 McKinstry Rd Trunk Rd to McAdam Park 854 Infill Duncan

Page 109 of 247

Table 11. Recommended Intersection Improvements and Prioritzation

Project No. Tier Project Name Type Jurisdiction 15 1 Canada Avenue and James Street Enhanced Crossing North Cowichan 16 1 Canada Avenue and Queens Road Enhanced Crossing Duncan 17 1 Trunk Road and Canada Avenue Signal Timing Study Duncan 18 2 Trans-Canada Highway and Coronation Avenue Signal Timing Study Duncan 19 2 Trans-Canada Highway and James Street Signal Timing Study North Cowichan 20 2 Trunk Road and Coronation Avenue Enhanced Crossing Duncan 21 2 Trunk Road and Festubert Street Signal Timing Study Duncan 22 3 Cowichan Way and Trans-Canada Highway New Signal Duncan 23 3 Trans-Canada Highway and Trunk Road Signal Timing Study Duncan Note: A signal timing study indicates an intersection where older pedestrians or pedestrians with physical impairments may benefit from signal phases which provide greater time to cross the intersection. Research indicates that 0.9 m/s is recommended for less capable pedestrians with shorter strides, slower gaits, and longer ‘start up’ time before leaving the curb.

Table 12. Recommended Bicycle Facilities and Prioritization

Proj. Improvement No. Tier Road Name Extent Type Len. Jurisdiction Cowichan Tribes border to 15 1 Allenby Rd Government St Bike Lane 34 Duncan 1,32 17 1 Canada Ave Trunk Rd to North Cowichan border Bike Lane 8 Duncan Shared Lane Chesterfield Marking/Bike 47 1 Ave Duncan border to Beverly St Boulevard 462 North Cowichan Coronation 21 1 Ave Ypres St to Trunk Rd Bike Lane 818 Duncan Shared Lane Cowichan Traffic Circle at intersection with Marking/Bike 48 1 Lake Rd Gibbins Rd Boulevard 94 North Cowichan Shared Lane Marking/Bike 22 1 Duncan St Trunk Rd to North Cowichan border Boulevard 427 Duncan Shared Lane Marking/Bike 50 1 Duncan St Duncan border to Beverly St Boulevard 494 North Cowichan Government 1,51 27 1 St Trunk Rd to Gibbins Rd Bike Lane 0 Duncan Shared Lane Canada Avenue to Trans-Canada Marking/Bike 51 1 James St Highway Boulevard 670 North Cowichan Trunk Road to North Cowichan 41 1 Lakes Rd Border Bike Lane 72 Duncan 39 1 Trunk Rd Government St along border with Bike Lane 590 Duncan and Page 110 of 247

Proj. Improvement No. Tier Road Name Extent Type Len. Jurisdiction Allenby Rd to Trans-Canada Hwy Cowichan Tribes

40 1 Underwood St Allenby Rd to Trunk Rd Bike Lane 102 Cowichan Tribes Shared Lane Chesterfield Avenue to Trans- Marking/Bike 43 2 Alexander St Canada Highway Boulevard 469 North Cowichan Shared Lane Marking/Bike 16 2 Boundary Rd Government St to Ingram St Boulevard 61 Duncan Centennial Park North 19 2 Trail Trunk Rd to Lukaitis Lane Multi Use Trail 389 Cowichan Tribes Shared Lane Chesterfield Coronation Avenue to North Marking/Bike 20 2 Ave Cowichanborder Boulevard 212 Duncan Trans-Canada Cowichan Tribes border to North 35 2 Hwy Cowichan border Cycle Track 410 Duncan Trans-Canada 53 2 Hwy Duncan border to Beverly St Cycle Track 907 North Cowichan Islay St/Philip Shared Lane St/ Berkeley Marking/Bike 49 2 St Cairnsmore St to Canada Ave Boulevard 646 North Cowichan Shared Lane Marking/Bike 23 2 Evans St Canada Ave to Jubilee St Boulevard 213 Duncan Shared Lane Marking/Bike 24 2 Festubert St Trunk Rd to North Cowichan border Boulevard 410 Duncan Shared Lane Marking/Bike 25 2 First St Centennial Park to Jubilee St Boulevard 186 Duncan Shared Lane Marking/Bike 26 2 Fourth St Canada Avenue to Jubilee St Boulevard 120 Duncan Shared Lane Marking/Bike 28 2 Ingram St Canada Ave to Boundary St Boulevard 368 Duncan Shared Lane Marking/Bike 38 2 James St Alley Canada Ave to Jubilee St Boulevard 140 Duncan Shared Lane Marking/Bike 29 2 Jubilee St Government St to Cavell St Boulevard 917 Duncan 1,37 52 2 Lakes Rd Duncan border to Townend Rd Bike Lane 3 North Cowichan Shared Lane 30 2 Third St Centennial Park to Jubilee St Marking/Bike 168 Duncan

Page 111 of 247

Proj. Improvement No. Tier Road Name Extent Type Len. Jurisdiction Boulevard

Shared Lane Marking/Bike 33 2 Queens Rd Canada Ave to Ypres St Boulevard 306 Duncan Trans-Canada 1,82 7 2 Hwy Allenby Rd to Cowichan Bay Rd Shoulder Bikeway 7 Cowichan Tribes Trans-Canada From North Cowichan Border to 42 2 Hwy Trunk Rd Cycle Track 550 Duncan Trans-Canada 2,03 54 2 Hwy Beverly St to Drinkwater Rd Shoulder Bikeway 6 North Cowichan Shared Lane Marking/Bike 37 2 Ypres St Coronation Avenue to Queens Rd Boulevard 71 Duncan 8 3 Tzouhalem Rd Lakes Rd to CVRD Border Shoulder Bikeway 316 Cowichan Tribes North Cowichan 1,75 and Cowichan 34 3 Tzouhalem Rd Along border Shoulder Bikeway 4 Tribes Cowichan Tribes border to 1,36 1 3 Allenby Rd Government St Shoulder Bikeway 3 Cowichan Tribes 1,14 36 1 Trunk Rd Trans-Canada Highway to Lakes Rd Bike Lane 8 Duncan Cowichan Tribes border to 185 m. 1,02 10 3 Allenby Rd east of Trans-Canada Highway Shoulder Bikeway 3 CVRD Allenby Rd to Trans-Canada 11 3 Boys Rd Highway Bike Lane 674 CVRD North Cowichan Trans-Canada Highway to Mission 1,03 and Cowichan 55 3 Boys Rd Rd Bike Lane 0 Tribes North Cowichan border to Sherman 45 3 Canada Ave Rd Bike Lane 343 North Cowichan Canada Beverly St to North Cowichan 18 3 Avenue Trail border Multi-Use Trail 413 Duncan Canada North Cowichan border to Sherman 46 3 Avenue Trail Rd Multi-Use Trail 326 North Cowichan Shared Lane Cowichan Marking/Bike 9 3 Way Trail to Central Rd Boulevard 283 Cowichan Tribes North Cowichan border to 2 3 Dike Trail Tzouhalem Rd Multi-Use Trail 77 Cowichan Tribes Cowichan Tribes border to Glenora 3,58 3 3 Indian Rd Rd Shoulder Bikeway 2 Cowichan Tribes 4 3 Miller Rd Indian Rd to CVRD Border Shoulder Bikeway 431 Cowichan Tribes Shared Lane 31 3 McKinstry Rd Trunk Rd to McAdam Park Marking/Bike 427 Duncan Page 112 of 247

Proj. Improvement No. Tier Road Name Extent Type Len. Jurisdiction Boulevard

McKinstry Trail 32 3 Connection McKinstry Rd to McAdam Park Multi-Use Trail 95 Duncan CVRD Border to Trans-Canada 1,52 5* 3 Miller Rd Highway Shoulder Bikeway 7 Cowichan Tribes Cowichan Tribes border (north and 1,28 13 3 Miller Rd south) Shoulder Bikeway 4 CVRD Trans-Canada 6 3 Hwy Allenby Rd to Boys Rd Cycle Track 431 Cowichan Tribes Trans-Canada 14 3 Hwy Boys Rd to Silver Bridge Cycle Track 122 Cowichan Tribes 1,97 44 2 Beverly St Lakes Rd to Canada Ave Bike Lane 5 North Cowichan * Project not shown on Map 13

Page 113 of 247

A key to successful plan implementation is ensuring funds to construct cycling and walking infrastructure. The following section provides a list of potential funding sources and strategies. As funding opportunities change regularly, this information is subject to change. Additionally, creating a dedicated budget line item in the capital and operating budget will ensure that some thought is given to active transportation during budget deliberations.

There are a number of funding sources and strategies that municipal governments can use to fund and implement pedestrian and bicycle facilities, as described below: General Funds: General funds are provided by property tax or other regular jurisdictional revenue streams. Capital projects are generally not allowed to utilize funding from this source unless funding is allocated as part of the annual budget. Bicycle and pedestrian infrastructure, education, enforcement, and encouragement projects may be an acceptable use of general fund dollars. Development Cost Charges: Municipalities can charge developers a series of “development cost charges” (DCCs) on new developments. The intent of these charges is to assist the municipality in funding the costs associated with increasing infrastructure to serve a growing and changing community. These charges include sewer, water, recreation, and transportation charges. Municipalities can use the transportation and recreation DCCs collected for active transportation infrastructure expenditures. Street User Fees or Maintenance Fees: The revenue generated by a street user fee is used for operations and maintenance of the street system, and priorities are established by the Public Works Department. Revenue from this fund should be used to maintain on-street bicycle and pedestrian facilities, including routine sweeping of bicycle lanes and other designated bicycle routes. Local Improvement Districts (LIDs): Local Improvement Districts (LIDs) are most often used by cities to construct localized projects such as streets, sidewalks, or bikeways. Through the LID process, the costs of local improvements are generally spread out among a group of property owners within a specified area. The cost can be allocated based on property frontage or other methods such as traffic trip generation. Business Improvement Districts (BIDs): Pedestrian improvements can often be included as part of larger efforts aimed at business improvement and retail district beautification. Business Improvement Districts collect levies on businesses in order to fund area-wide improvements that benefit businesses and improve access for customers. These districts may include provisions for pedestrian and bicycle improvements, such as wider sidewalks and landscaping. Road Rehabilitation: Active transportation facilities can be implemented as part of ongoing road rehabilitation projects. Accordingly, municipalities may adjust certain pedestrian and bicycle infrastructure priorities (moved forward or deferred) to reflect their plans for major roadworks. In addition, many municipalities have established policies that require consideration of pedestrian and cycling facilities in any road rehabilitation project. Other Capital Works: Often active transportation facilities can be implemented as part of a separate capital works project. For example, cycling infrastructure can be implemented in conjunction with sewer or sidewalk improvements. Page 114 of 247

Cash-in-lieu Parking: Recent changes to the Local Government Act allow municipalities to use funding from cash-in-lieu parking reserves to fund alternative transportation such as active transportation network upgrades. Development Opportunities: Municipalities may require private developers to construct pedestrian and bicycle facilities along roadways fronting new developments. This represents an important contribution to the community’s pedestrian and bicycle network, but may offer the municipality opportunities for providing more widespread active transportation improvements in conjunction with development. For example, municipalities may choose to accelerate a given bicycle project to complete a bicycle route if private development occurs along a portion of that road segment.

In addition to the local government funding sources described above, there are other public sector sources of funding for active transportation facilities and programs, include the programs identified below. However, to take advantage of many of these public sector funding opportunities applicants are required to have completed detailed designs and engineering cost estimates. Typically design costs are ineligible for cost share funding, while the capital costs of construction are eligible. As funding opportunities change regularly, the information in this section is subject to change. Municipalities should regularly check with all levels of government to keep up to date on funding opportunities. BikeBC: BikeBC is a provincial initiative to promote new, safe, and high quality cycling infrastructure through cost-sharing with local governments. BikeBC is a $31 million umbrella initiative that consists of the programs described below:

o Provincial Cycling Investment Program (PCIP): This program focuses on strategic investments to build important cycling corridors of regional and provincial significance. Some possible projects include new bicycle trails and bicycle lanes, improvements to existing cycling infrastructure, and providing for bicycle lockers and other equipment that makes cycling a safer and more convenient option for travelers. Eligible projects under this program could include regional connections to other municipalities or major connections within the municipality that make use of high quality cycling facilities such as off-street pathways and bicycle lanes.

o Local Government Infrastructure Planning Grant Program: The Ministry of Community and Rural Development offers grants to support local governments in projects related to the development of sustainable community infrastructure that will improve public health and safety, protect the natural environment, and strengthen local and regional economies. Grants up to $10,000 are available to study the feasibility, costs, technology, and location of proposed sewer, water, drainage, transportation, or other local government infrastructure. Grants can be used for a range of activities related to assessing the technical, environmental, and/or economic feasibility of municipal infrastructure projects.

Further Information: Ministry of Community and Rural Development, Infrastructure and Finance Division 250-387-4060 [email protected] www.cd.gov.bc.ca/lgd/infra/infrastructure_grants/infrastructure_planning_grant.htm

Page 115 of 247

Gas Tax Fund: Gas tax is collected annually by the federal government. Jurisdictions receive a proportion of the federal dollars based on their population through the Gas Tax Fund (GTF). The GTF provides 100% funding to local governments for a variety of capital and planning projects. The GTF provides a predictable and long-term funding source for local governments. The GTF supports environmentally sustainable municipal infrastructure, such as public transit, drinking water, wastewater infrastructure, green energy, solid waste management, and transportation.

Infrastructure Canada: Historically, Infrastructure Canada has managed several programs that provide funding for environmental and local transportation infrastructure projects in municipalities across Canada in addition to the Gas Tax Fund. Typically, the federal government contributes one-third of the cost of municipal infrastructure projects. Provincial and municipal governments contribute the remaining funds, and in some instances, there may be private sector investment as well.

Further Information: Infrastructure Canada http://www.infc.gc.ca/ip-pi/index-eng.html

Other Federal Programs: At any given time, there are usually one or more federal grant programs for which active transportation facilities would be eligible. As an example, in the past, Environment Canada provided grants through the Environmental Partners Fund for bicycle-related projects that demonstrated a benefit to the environment and formed partnerships with the community.

Note that eligibility for some federal programs is limited to not-for-profit organizations. By forming partnerships with local not-for-profit organizations, local governments can access a number of alternative funding sources and grant programs for bicycle projects. Also, because the primary applicant for funds is the not-for-profit group, they are nominally in charge of the project. Many of the grants available to not-for-profit groups from the federal government are designed to provide jobs for people receiving Employment Insurance. Therefore, in order to qualify, the project must create new, preferably skills-based jobs, filled only by those receiving EI.

Other Funding Sources There are a number of other sources of funding that local governments can consider for financing active transportation projects and programs, including: The Insurance Corporation of British Columbia (ICBC): ICBC has, in the past, provided funding for active transportation facilities, particularly where these have the potential to reduce crashes, improve safety, and reduce claims costs to ICBC. Funding is available through ICBC’s Road Improvement Program (http://www.icbc.com/road-safety/safer-roads/invest-roads).

Private Sector: Mountain Equipment Co-Op is an example of a business that provides funding that could be applied to bicycle and pedestrian facilities and programs. To protect the environment in areas having significant recreational value, and to facilitate public access and recreational use of areas, Mountain Equipment Co-Op supports applications from member groups and not-for-profit organizations. Page 116 of 247

Many corporations wish to be good corporate neighbours, to be active in the community and to promote environmentally-beneficial causes. A bicycle network is well-suited to corporate sponsorship, and has attracted significant sponsorship both at the local level and throughout North America. Examples in B.C. include Construction Aggregates in Sechelt, which constructed an overpass over a gravel conveyor to provide a link for pedestrians and cyclists, and 7-Eleven and Molson Breweries, which have sponsored multi-use pathways in Vancouver, Burnaby, and New Westminster.

Deeds, Donations, and Dedications: In many communities, multi-use pathways have been funded in part or in whole by local residents who purchased “deeds” to sections of the pathway. The Trans-Canada Trail, for example, is funded partially by sales of one metre sections for $40. Kelowna partially funded development of a pathway along Mission Creek in Kelowna through community donations. Similar to park bench dedication programs, a dedication program can be set up for residents and corporations to donate bicycle facilities, such as bicycle racks or lockers. In many cases, these deeds, donations, and dedications are tax-deductible where they are administered by a not-for-profit agency.

Page 117 of 247 Dunc~nA'e~ Active Tr~nsponallonPlan

~ .....~ • • ...... " f _.1 ~'.... j1 '-; I'~ IWtioc.J ...-~ ' ..~ . ...."x ~ ...... ,.....~. , ' ••• • - 0 ••••••••• / . ' .. ' ......

.•' • • ¥ I I ~ NO",,".~eOW,eHA' . .~ .-!...£___ 1:\'-' ~ L-.___:.. r;r I'-'ill, 1 JI : I . '0. ••• 0

NORTH COWICHAN \ I

.·······"1'9· ... ~-I l _ I * "--,_ ..- ,_e.. _----..... __ ....., .., ...... ' . - -~ - to....., , .. -- ~, NORTH COWICHAN ..,... M ,.... ,-- COWICHAN TRIBES EZ2J"~c-.rao lc:om.o.

ALTA PLANNING + DESIGN 1 .... 69 Page 118of247 This page intentionally blank Page 119of247 " "- 0 ~ ~ , < ~ , . , • , ; 0 0 0 0 .- f , ...... ," ) ~. ! -~ +' /;. l ! / <. ~ l , - , ', .",.. I J ,.- ...... ""p<' .I : ~ 0 z I " -" : · · · . . . .' . . · · · , " . . : " j : ;1 1 '- l I i' liHlh Idl , I • . : .- ! ! I i H t I \ I L.j I- nii I / :1 1 i i 0 ~ § ! J

" • • • • 0 0 z • ~ • z z ~ • Page 120of247 This page intentionally blank Page 121of247 < . . ~!~~I~~ 1 b- • 1 • ! i / i • l \\ "-Z'Hh ~--' ! d ~ iI. - I _ .' ...... , ' . / I __ • ~ A ~ u f I • ~ ~

; • • o z ~ ~ • z z ~ • Page 122of247 This page intentionally blank Page 123of247

; • • o • z z ~ • Page 124of247 This page intentionally blank

Page 125of247 I / I l ~ ...-_M . ~ G J ~ i , , . i !'l IL ~ \ .iJHlddi if' . 0 I! • « .. I ! J f ! I l : 1 f

; • • o z ~ ~ • z z ~ • Page 126of247 This page intentionally blank

Page 127of247 < ...... 1 • . I • - , .., I • l ~ . I . • ;; ". - .. . • ~ . I • ~ , j,,- 1 i i • u z'b ~!!!~rr ~~~~ ~.< . < • ~ ' ! . \ l • .. L " . i , / : ~ " ~ ~ • -.11-. , • i -- • i f 1 •

; • < o z ~ ~ • z z ~ • Page 128of247 This page intentionally blank

Page 129of247 < . . ,: i f . .- -. . • ~ .. - " • ...... "ti , , . ~ -. - . . . u . '"' \0;1 : . . 1 ~~g)z~ ~ i u ~~~« ~:::~« ~ l ! o li j e ~ e I • .· !li ,., \ \ · ' ", i : · l! I • f • ' l .. · :jq I ill \ i . lil 1'1" ! i . ~ . 100 • - ~ ~,,- • z ~ ,.! • ~ ~ ~ f f ~ : • I 1 .. I 1 ~ \ i I '" '5 " " " '" ~ ~ ~ • • • > c ~ ~ ~

; • • u z ~ ~ • z z ~ • Page 130of247 This page intentionally blank

Page 131of247 Dunc~nA 'e~Ac tive Tr~nsponallon Plan

_. _ ·~_'WlI .._ ...... _ .....""" ...... _irl .,. r----;- _"...... -2011"... .. -y "Y/X ) _w.._ bfATP___ pr-.g __ 100 ...... -_ ...... ::;.__...... ,... t I>t_eSuN..,...... _ -...-... _SlfH' ...... J. 1 __ y~:,! r- '-; ""'-, ) / 't 'j -+ l. 1 _ 1--, ~ ~.~ ') \I~1 ------'---, , / ", r ,~." -[ //.'~:;j; T ";-;J ", "r~ -- , 1 --. 'l!-"- ; rr""::::,,· i \ .. • " TT " ,w--Tr. '-'p-- _. ;:::::.J--- \.. ~ "', 1\,\ 1 II • .___ • "'~'\ I -- J\ ~,,>. I , ~ . I .- " I .~ -t ...,- j \,. \. ..,':\. .i ;-",::...--·· ...; :::r. \ " jL' - 1 1 \, l '...... I ~ ' . ---- :.&,-CV.I ,--; - lR. vr. i '. - B • •• • • • . il. * _ ...- - '. ~ ~ , '"+ ... !=\ -I · II. j' . .! ..- ...' £-.,. DM " , . ..L--1--1,-.TI""'L:l.lT., .... ' ...' ....-- ...", - --' j J _ .. ! . \[I~ - " 0 .....- ~~

... i-¥"'\ C~~:':"'-- I i~'".-.J - ~r:~' I "",""'AREA 0 I, " ~ 0 --_ ~, ~ _ U-E. \..-" -' - " _. ~ ..'\ ('-'" h.>.. Hi...... --./ - , -. < L J ---- ~ -, ...... ,.~ '.\ .,1 _·utw..... [ ~ COWlCHA.N TttI8ES . ) ,'\ Ii .~;:T=l_~':"-_-l nt COWICHA~ _ ! ' i ! COWICHANOR N fAI8E! ' ' ...

ALTA PLANNING + DESIGN 1 .... 63 Page 132of247 This page intentionally blank

Page 133of247 I .\ I ~ ") / 1 \ ...... ; ... -'" - . V ~ ,. s ~

; • • o • z z ~ • Page 134of247 This page intentionally blank

Page 135of247 Kimberly Dr

Da George St St Note:Note: A Detailed detailed survey survey was was conducted conducted for for

v ary

Agira Rd York Rd Larkspur Dr s M Rd areas within the study area defined in light

Cr il Timbercrest Dr Moose Rd

e l gray in Augusts 2011. A less detailed P McNe

e Way a i

Pl windsheild survey was conducted for ATP Cowichan Lakes Rd Falaise Rd Trillium Terr 5

ondal inth corridors providing linkages to other v A Trillium Way Wister

e G#$5 St Philip St population centres. Survey was not onehaven Dr Hyac

Trillium Pl an E & N Keystone Dr '$conducted for Jubilee Street between Seine Pl Trans-Canada Hw Seine Rd ital Berkeley St

urning l Evans Street and Governmentd Street. Railway t #R)*)$ Ar R Manor Dr n ll dale St hem Rd e Holmes Trans Canada High w th o

n District Hosp t R St Q y uami icha agle St w y S chan N e

lege St ccess 56 Co Par ol Isla k R

C Holmes t d S Trans-Canada Hwy 5 mall a ly

Rd d (! Duncan Elementary School VistaAv Quamichan Middle School Hillwood r way

kes Rd kes Cowichan District Hospital ins R m

all access Cairnsmore St La Gibb Beve Baker rison Pl Rd Alexander Elementary School u

idland Pl 7 M wnsey Ave (! Highland Ave D Queen Margaret's SchoolBro euc Dun Cavell 57 Ki d hars Herbert St l R A

nch A White Rd can S Lewis St P h u Heather St (!13 Birc b Dr u Up Cedar Ave r University Way n ve lan P ruce t Government ine Ave Fourth St Cr

d Sp e

A York Rd s Way

ve 58 d Ave

ty i 11 Vian St 59 Dingwall St W 3rd St Third St (! Cowichan Sportsplex(!12 Wilson Ave Wilson butus Ave Ar St (!19 Howar S J y a

Banks Rd Banks Rosewood

Univers c y Island Oak High School Clements St James St a n m B e o r s gwood Ave ier R Do Second St 15 re bilee bilee St (! d S A S v Lashma n Ave Ju Island Savings Centre 10 t t e

Alexander St (! Dr a

First St t (!9

rgin k Ave k

n St

oc Tzouhalem Rd

NORTH COWICHAN Geo

!6 Garde Heml ( Alderlea S Powell St

Eva St ns St 14 Cliffs Rd r (! (!4 (!16 Q u

a Queens Rd istle Charlotte St 2 Ingram St (! m

Wh c Prevost Rd h

Festubert S t 3 (! a Khowhemun Elementary School 18 n (! t Coronation Ave R Canada t

(!20 Lomas Rd d

bell S bell Jubilee S Jubilee

ian S ian

p d

Ypr es St ul

NORTH COWICHAN m 000.125 .25

A k Ave

Brae Rd Rd t J

Station St c ve Ca Kilometers

S Robertson St

nk Ave Beech I y Rd y Craig St Craig 17 Tru

(! Da McKinstryRd 23 R revost

(! Bundo CITY OF DUNCAN P

Somenos S Georgetown Rd 21 (! d Rd Oak St Chaster St R Khowh Cowichan Way Watson St emun Rd es Existing Dike

k instry

W St

Dobson Rd La l l

il cK

lies mall access l M

Rd l Recommmended Intersection Improvements

Club Rd COWICHAN Wharncliffe Rd

Rd r 8 ampbe

rice P rice (! Improved Pedestrian Crossing TRIBES C ý"

Rd Rive Castle St Lee St URBANIZED Ave h "! ec !

e "

stle Pl AREA B ! New Traffic Signal or Crossing Beacon hutstun Park Pl " W nby Rd Ca Seymour Pl e Alle Al Wilson Grov McAdam Park Thorne R Qwulshemut Rd d (!22 Consider Signal Timing Study Church (!1 Indian Rd Rd Proposed Improvement C owicha Sidewalk n River 60 Recommended E & N Railway Project Phasing ^ Points of Interest Miller Rd 61 (Additional Details Existing Trails in Tables 11 and 12)

Indian Rd n School d

l 21 i ! Tier 1 (Short Term) p (Boys Rd Administrative Boundary COWICHAN TRIBES NORTH COWICHAN U

35 Park d 62 Stotl (! Tier 2 (Medium Term)

T R

om R

COWICHAN TRIBES e

CVRD ou Plan Study Area st

57 e Rd

(! Tier 3 (Long Term) d d

Jacob Rd Khowutzun Way o M Mission Rd Map 1212 Recommended Plan Area Pedestrian Pedestrian Facility Facility ImprovementsImprovements Duncan Area Active Transportation Plan 56 $R, 59 $#R) 62 $R 34#5- -#R)* * ,.#R)* [2R$#)*G,. 7- 57 $R 60 $ /.) #R)* -, [G>/.)?>2R /2R# $?>$L),? $#)* $#R) 58 61 [G4$)$=3 * /$L), Page 136of247 This page intentionally blank

Page 137of247 Wisteria Way r Kimberly Dr Note:Note: A detailed Detailed survey survey was was conductedconducted for for George St unsigned Agira Rd York Rd areas within the study area defined in MarySt 45 Moose Rd (! light gray in August 2011. A less detailed Timbercrest D Cowichan Lakes Rd 46 McNeil Rd (! windsheild survey was conducted for Trillium Terr 5 Canada Av DavisATP corridorsCres providing linkages to other Trillium Way Avondale Pl Philip St G#$5population centres. Survey was not Caen Rd (!52 Keystone Dr Seine Pl Seine Rd '$conducted for Jubilee Street between Berkeley St fire lane d e Evans Street andR Government Street. #R)*)$l Manor Dr y St Trans Canada Highway wel T Arn th Qu rans- hem o a St Isla m R ic Stonehaven Dr e Rd ha (!49 (!18 Ca n Nagle St P Ave n ar ada Hwy 63 k Cowichan District Hospital^ (!48 Holmes St Rd Colleg d mall access R Duncan Elementary School Quamichan Middle School

mall access n Cairnsmore St Vista n nAlexander Elementary School Murison Pl Bake r Rd Gibbins Beverly St St Recommended Highland Av (!44 Queen Margaret's SchoolBrownsey Ave (!29 Vancouver Island University Project Phasing Kinch Ave

Deuchars Dr

n Herbert St Cavell White Rd n Lewis St (Additional Detail Heather St Sycamore St Up Cedar Pl (!53 Government St in Table 13) Cedar University Way land Pine Ave e (!26 Ave York Rd (!21 Tier 1 (Short Term)

Ave (!17 Vian St s Rd s Third St Dingwall St (!47 Cowichan Sportsplex (!30 ^ (!35 Tier 2 (Medium Term) WilsonAve ^

Island Oak High School 50 James St Bank (!38 (! ^ (!51 akes Rd n gwood Ave Cowichan Aquatic Centre L Do ^ (!57 Tier 3 (Long Term) Lashman Ave Cowichan Secondary Duncan St n Centennial Park 43 eldAve NORTHn COWICHAN lee St First St (! Howard Ave Q (!25 terfi Tzouhalem Rd ua

Jubi Dr a m n

Powell S i

27 t ic Ches

! Garden St ( Alderlea St Hemlock Ave Evans St St (!41(!2 h Cliffs Rd 8 a (!23 (! 000.125 .25n Charlotte St !20 Kilometers R

( Georg Ingram St I d n (!28 Queens Rd (!33 (!16 (!22 37 Khowhemun Elementary School (! Coronation Ave Whistler Kenneth St E & St stubert (!36 Gabourie Pl ^ (!21

ellSt Lomas Rd

Lakes Rd

N Railway b d eechAve NORTH COWICHAN (!35 B Existing Dike

Station St 24 Robertson St mp st Rd st Brae Rd (! Khowhe Ypres St Recommended Network

Trunk R Ca

Craig St Craig d CITY OF DUNCAN R Day

McKinstry Rd McKinstry Bicycle Lane (!15 Prevo (!40 (!39 m Bicycle Lane - Constrained Conditions un Oak St Chaster St Kuw'utsun Hu Yi'xwule' Watson St Rd Willies Rd n Cycle Track mall access Dobson Rd

Lakes Rd Penny Lane liffe Rd Pl Wharnc Cycle Track - Constrained Conditions Club Rd ^ COWICHAN 31 (!19 TRIBES (! Shared Lane Marking

Price Castle St Lee St h Ave h River Rd River URBANIZED !42 ( Shoulder Bikeway E & N Rai AREA Park Pl Cowichan Way ^ Beec Shoulder Bikeway - Constrained Conditions t Rd Al Wilson Grove mu Thorne Seymour Pl Hwy he 1 McAdam Park Qwuls (! Rd Trail lway (!9 32 (! Existing Bicycle Lane Church Rd Cowich an River Existing Trails Indian Rd 60 (!3 64 Trans-Canada ^ Points of Interest (!4 (!14 n School (!36 d

Allenby Rd R

Indian Rd l Note: Project Five - Millar Road from the Administrative Boundary i Boys Rd p

NORTH COWICHAN U CVRD Border to Trans-Canada Highway, 55 Park T a Long Term project, is not shown on (! o CVRD COWICHAN TRIBES m COWICHAN TRIBES Plan Study Area

this map. R (!13 !11 ( d

Jacob Rd Khowutzun Way Miller Rd Miller Map 13. Plan Area Recommended Bikeway Facility Improvements and Phasing Duncan Area Active Transportation Plan

60 $ /.) 34#5- -, [)G@'@.#@.,-6G@ 3>#? 63 $RG, /2R# --2?@ [.<3 >#?>#? $LG [.)#@#)*2R$G,.,- 64 /$L), .$=3 3 32R$G [G>/.)?>2R$?>$L),? See Map 12. Plan Area Pedestrian Facility Improvements for Project #61 and #62 Page 138of247 This page intentionally blank

Page 139of247 Page 140 of 247

This page intentionally blank

Page 141 of 247

4-921 Alta Planning + Design Page 142 of 247

Duncan Area Active Transportation Plan Design Guide

April 2014 Page 143 of 247

Duncan Area Active Transportation Plan

Design Guidelines 1.1 Introduction

The purpose of the Duncan Area Active Transportation Plan Design Guidelines is to identify resources that are available to transportation professionals that will guide the planning, design, and implementation of safe, comfortable, and convenient pedestrian and cycling infrastructure. The guidelines build on existing local practice as well as current best practice in the region, nationally, and internationally. The resources used to compile these guidelines include: Transportation Association of Canada’s (TAC) Geometric Design Guide for Canadian Roads, Bikeway Traffic Control Guidelines for Canada, and Guidelines for the Design and Application of Bicycle Pavement Markings

British Columbia Ministry of Transportation and Infrastructure’s (BC MOTI) Manual of Standard Traffic Signs & Pavement Markings.

Guidelines from other Provinces and the United States, including the Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO) Guide for the Development of Bicycle Facilities. The Capital Regional District’s (CRD’s) Pedestrian and Cycling Masterplan developed in 2010 that provides comprehensive guidelines for the planning and design of a range of bicycle and pedestrian facilities. The National Association of City Transportation Officials’ (NACTO) (United States) Urban Bikeway Design Guide in 2011, which explores best practices for innovative bicycle and pedestrian planning. Guidance from Europe including the CROW Design Manual for Bicycle Traffic, published in 2007 provides. A complete list of Design Guideline References is provided in Appendix G. 1.2 How to Use this Guide

These design guidelines are intended to provide a consistent and comprehensive reference for the implementation of walkway and bikeway networks in Duncan, North Cowichan and Cowichan Tribes lands. The guide is structured to provide context to the planning considerations for pedestrian and bikeway facilities and provides specific guidance for various facility types. Each treatment is described in terms of its intended purpose, typical use, and intended benefits. An image is provided along with specific design guidance including minimum dimensions, typical clearances, etc. Reference to additional resources is also provided. Throughout these guidelines, on-street measurements are taken from the edge of the gutter pan, rather than the edge of curb. Over time, the interface between the pavement surface and the gutter pan can form a lip that poses a hazard to cyclists if located within the bikeway. In addition, TAC and other design guidelines use dimensions exclusive of the gutter pan. Typically, gutter pans are approximately 0.2 metres wide to allow adequate drainage.

Page 144 of 247

Design Guidelines

In a number of places, these design guidelines provide “minimum” and “recommended” dimensions. Whilst “recommended” dimensions are preferred, “minimum” dimensions provide tolerance for applications in constrained environments. 1.3 Guiding Principles

The following are key principles that should be considered in the planning of pedestrian and cycling facilities in both the public and private realm: The walking and cycling environments should be safe. Sidewalks, multi-use trails, crossings, and cycling routes should be designed and built to be free of hazards and to minimize conflicts with external factors such as noise, vehicular traffic and protruding architectural elements as well as conflict between cyclists and pedestrians. Design should reflect the sustainable transportation hierarchy. The pedestrian and cycling network should be accessible. Sidewalks, multi-use trails, and crosswalks should ensure the mobility of all users by accommodating the needs of people regardless of age or ability. Cyclists have a range of skill levels and facilities should be designed for the use of experienced and inexperienced cyclists to the greatest extent possible. In areas where specific needs have been identified (for example, near schools) the needs of appropriate types of pedestrians and cyclists should be accommodated. The pedestrian and cycling network should connect to places people want to go. The pedestrian and cycling network should provide continuous direct routes and convenient connections between destinations, including homes, schools, shopping areas, public services, recreational opportunities and transit. The walking and cycling environment should be clear and easy to use. Sidewalks, multi-use trails, and crossings should be designed so people, including those with or without mobility, sensory, and cognitive \ impairments, can easily find and navigate the route. All roads in Duncan, North Cowichan and on Cowichan Tribes land are legal for the use of bicyclists meaning that they should be designed, marked and maintained accordingly. The walking and cycling environment should provide good places. Good design should integrate with, and support the development of complementary uses, and should encourage preservation and construction of art, landscaping, and other items that add public value. These components might include open spaces such as plazas, wayfinding, signing, courtyards, and squares and amenities including street furniture, banners, art, plantings and special paving, which, along with historical elements and cultural references, should promote a sense of place. Public activities should be encouraged and commercial activities such as dining, vending and advertising may be permitted when they do not interfere with safety and accessibility. A complete network of on-street bicycling facilities should connect seamlessly to the existing and proposed multi-use trails to complete recreational and commuting routes around Duncan. Cycling and pedestrian improvements should be economical. Bicycle and pedestrian improvements should be designed to achieve the maximum benefit for their cost (capital and maintenance) as well as reduce reliance on more expensive modes of transportation. Where possible, improvements in the right-of-way should stimulate, reinforce and connect with adjacent development. Maintenance that minimizes should be considered as part of good design.

Page 145 of 247

Duncan Area Active Transportation Plan

Design guidelines should guide the development of context sensitive solutions. Specific National and Provincial guidelines are identified in this document, as well as design treatments that may exceed these guidelines. It is recognized that statutory and regulatory guidance may change. For this reason, and others, the guidance and recommendations in this document are meant to complement the other resources considered during the design process. In addition, land use and other planning initiatives impact walkability and bikeability, and should complement the techniques outlined in this document. 1.4 Design Needs of Pedestrians

Pedestrian facilities should be designed to comfortably accommodate pedestrians and should consider expected types and volumes of pedestrians. High volume pedestrian include places like downtown recreational facilities, bus stops, and schools. Universal design and accessibility should be a priority – particularly where vulnerable and disabled pedestrians are expected. Pedestrian facilities should: Provide an unobstructed, continuous and safe circulation system that serves the same destinations as are served by the road system. Provide convenient access to local land uses and transit. Reduce motor vehicle speeds when in locations where pedestrians are expected. Motor vehicle/pedestrian crashes at 30 km/hr result in fatalities about five percent of the time, while collisions at 45 km/hr are fatal about 45 percent of the time and 85 percent of collisions at 60 km/hr result in death. Provide a buffer for pedestrians and adjacent properties from motor vehicle impacts such as volume, tail-pipe emissions and noise. Provide visual interest and support community interaction through open space and other public activity space achieved through details in design of public and private sides and buildings where they interact with public areas. Safely accommodate people of all ages and abilities. Support environmental goals through the integration of green infrastructure. Maximize the interaction between pedestrians and drivers, e.g. by maintaining effective sight lines at intersections and driveways. Additional pedestrian treatments for mixed-use streets are shown in Table 4.

Page 146 of 247

Design Guidelines

Table 1. Treatments for Pedestrian Priority Areas Element Usage Corridor Treatments Both sides of street along all routes. Minimum clear width 1.8m 2.3m preferred, furnishing Sidewalks zone 1.0m. (page 5) Recommended, particularly along major roads; 3.0m (arterial) or 2.0m (collector/local Boulevards streets). (page 5) Intersection Treatments (page 24 – 28) Marked crosswalks Standard treatment at intersections. Advance warnings At marked crossings/pedestrian signals along collector and arterial roadways. Raised median At marked crossings/pedestrian signals along collector and arterial roadways. In-street “yield to At marked crossings along high pedestrian volume roads. pedestrian” signs/flashers Curb extensions At intersections with streets that have high motor vehicle speeds and/or volumes or poor visibility. Median refuge islands At intersections with streets that have high motor vehicle speeds and/or volumes. Minimizing curb radii Locations with high percentage of right-turning motor vehicle traffic and through- pedestrian traffic. Parking control At high-use locations, where on-street parking is allowed. Advance stop bars At high-use locations, where on-street parking is allowed. Accessible curb ramps At all intersections. Use with detectible warnings. Bicycle/pedestrian traffic At unsignalized locations where high numbers of pedestrians cross a major road, such as by signals a school or along a trail. Pedestrian push-buttons At all signalized intersections, if the pedestrian phase is not automatic. Automatic signals are recommended unless pedestrian presence is occasional. Countdown signal At all signalized intersections. Audible pedestrian signal At major intersections or where vulnerable pedestrian groups (young or elderly) are likely to cross. Leading pedestrian At major intersections or where vulnerable pedestrian groups (young or elderly) are likely to interval cross. Pedestrian Elements Pedestrian scale lighting Along all routes. Pedestrian amenities Along commercial corridors. Yellow paint To highlight curb drops or other areas that require pedestrian caution.

1.4.1 School Routes

School routes may receive priority to ensure safety of students. These routes should enhance the visibility of pedestrians and provide clear and convenient facilities that encourage appropriate use. Specific treatments may include: high visibility-crosswalks, in-pavement flashers, signage, warning beacons, etc.

Page 147 of 247

Duncan Area Active Transportation Plan

1.1. Basic Sidewalk Design Summary

Design Summary

Attributes of well-designed sidewalks include the following: Accessibility: A network of sidewalks shall be accessible to all users. Adequate width: Two people should be able to walk side-by-side and pass a third comfortably, and different walking speeds should be possible. In areas of intense pedestrian use, sidewalks should accommodate the high volume of walkers. Safety: Design features of the sidewalk should allow pedestrians to have a sense of security and predictability. Sidewalk users should not feel they are at risk due to the presence of adjacent traffic. Continuity: Walking routes should be obvious and should not require pedestrians to travel out of their way unnecessarily. Landscaping: Plantings and street trees within the boulevard should contribute to the overall psychological and visual comfort of sidewalk users, and be designed in a manner that contributes to the safety of people. Social space: There should be places for standing, visiting, and

sitting. The sidewalk area should be a place where adults and A well-designed sidewalk provides plenty of children can safely participate in public life. pedestrian space. Quality of place: Sidewalks should contribute to the character of neighbourhoods and business districts.

Discussion

Sidewalks are the most fundamental element of the walking network, as they provide an area for pedestrian travel that is separated from vehicle traffic. Sidewalks are typically constructed out of concrete and are separated from the roadway by a curb or gutter and sometimes a landscaped boulevard. Sidewalks are a common application in urban and suburban environments. Installing new sidewalks can be costly, particularly if drainage improvements such as undergrounding of roadside culverts and installation of curb/gutter are part of the design. However, fixing short gaps in an existing sidewalk network is important to maximize system continuity, and can be a relatively low-cost fix.

Guidance

United States Access Board. (2002). Accessibility Guidelines for Buildings and Facilities. United States Access Board. (2007). Public Rights-of-Way Accessibility Guidelines (PROWAG).

Page 148 of 247

Design Guidelines

1.1.1. Zones in the Sidewalk Corridor

Design Summary

The sidewalk corridor is typically located within the public right-of-way between the curb or roadway edge and the property line. The sidewalk corridor contains four distinct zones, which have different purposes. Recommended and minimum widths are provided following.

Zones in the sidewalk network.

Discussion

The Gutter Zone Curbs prevent water in the street gutters from entering the pedestrian space, discourage vehicles from driving over the sidewalk, and make it easy to sweep the streets. In addition, the gutter helps define the pedestrian environment within the streetscape, although other designs can be effective for this purpose. At the corner, the curb is an important tactile element for pedestrians who are finding their way with the use of a cane. The Boulevard Zone The boulevard buffers pedestrians from the adjacent roadway, and is also the area where elements such as street trees, signal poles, utility poles, street lights, controller boxes, hydrants, signs, parking meters, driveway aprons, grates, hatch covers, and street furniture are properly located. This is the area where people alight from parked cars. The Sidewalk Zone The sidewalk is the area intended for pedestrian travel. This zone should be entirely free of permanent and temporary objects. The Furnishing Zone/Border The Furnishing Zone allows pedestrians a comfortable "shy" distance from the building fronts, in areas where buildings are at the lot line, or from elements such as fences and hedges on private property.

Guidance

TAC Geometric Design Guide for Canadian Roads, Chapter 2.2: Cross Section Elements, section 2.2.6.1: Sidewalks, Boulevards, and Border Areas.

Page 149 of 247

Duncan Area Active Transportation Plan

1.5 Design Needs of Bicyclists

Cyclist behavior, and speed, varies depending on the skill and experience of the cyclist. There are several ways to classify cyclists that are helpful in understanding the range of design parameters, although it is noted that these classifications change over time as more cyclists cycle more often and other interventions (such as a cycling instructional course) change a less confident cyclist to a more confident one. Bicycle infrastructure should be designed to accommodate as many user types as possible and may include parallel facilities that account for different cyclist types.

The following classification system has been adopted for these guidelines:

Strong and Fearless (low percentage of population) – Characterized by bicyclists that will typically ride anywhere regardless of roadway conditions or weather. These bicyclists typically ride faster, prefer direct routes, and prefer on-street facilities – even if shared with vehicles – over separate, less direct and slower facilities such as multi-use trails. Enthused and Confident (5-10% of population) -This user group includes ‘intermediate’ cyclists who are comfortable riding on all types of bicycle facilities but typically prefer low traffic streets or multi-use trails when available. These cyclists may deviate from a more direct route in favour of a preferred facility type. This group includes all kinds of cyclists including commuters, recreationalists, racers, and utilitarian cyclists. Interested but Concerned (approximately 60% of population) – This user type makes up the bulk of the cycling population and represents cyclists who typically only ride a bicycle on low traffic streets or multi-use trails under favourable conditions and weather. These cyclists perceive significant barriers towards increased use of cycling with regards to traffic and safety. These cyclists may become “Enthused & Confident” with encouragement, education and experience. No Way, No How (approximately 30% of population) – Persons in this category are not cyclists, and have little to no interest in becoming cyclists or are physically unable to ride. This group is still important from the perspective of encouraging good driving behavior and greater awareness of cyclists as road users.

Page 150 of 247

Design Guidelines

1.6 On-Street Bicycle Facility Typology

A range of bicycle facilities can be applied in various contexts, providing varying levels of protection or separation from automobile traffic. There are no ‘hard and fast’ rules for determining the most appropriate type of facility for a particular location; engineering judgement and planning skills are critical elements of this decision. However, consistent use of treatments and application of bikeway facilities allows users to anticipate whether they would feel comfortable riding on a particular facility, and plan their trips accordingly.

1.6.1 User Type Classification

Bikeway class indicates what types of users might feel comfortable on a particular bikeway facility. The Cycling in Cities Program at the University of British Columbia found that the most significant factors influencing bicycle use are motor vehicle traffic volumes and speeds.1 The study also found that most cyclists have a preference for facilities that are separated from motor vehicle traffic or that are located on local roads with low motor vehicle traffic speeds and volumes. Because off-street pathways are physically separated from the roadway, they are perceived as safe and attractive routes for cyclists who prefer to avoid motor vehicle traffic. A stated preference experiment in Edmonton found that for the typical cyclist, one minute cycling in mixed traffic is as onerous as 4.1 minutes on bike lanes.2 The CRD design guidelines identify the following classes of facilities by user type: R Class 1 facilities provide a high degree of separation between cyclists and motor vehicle traffic and which are comfortable for all users including recreational and inexperienced cyclists; R Class 2 facilities, which provide a moderate degree of separation from motor vehicle traffic and offer enhanced traffic calming treatments on local roadways; and R Class 3 facilities generally include on-street facilities with limited physical separation from motor vehicle traffic but which may appeal to commuter cyclists due to their route connectivity.

1.6.2 Levels of Facility Separation

Standards for classifying bikeway types are provided in the Transportation Association of Canada (TAC) Bikeway Traffic Control Guidelines for Canada (2010 Draft), Geometric Design Guide for Canadian Roads, and MUTCD- Canada. The variety of existing facility classifications used in the CRD and member municipalities was synthesized into the categories: R Multi-use trails are physically separated from motor vehicles and provide sufficient width and supporting facilities to be used by cyclists, pedestrians, and other non-motorized users.

1 http://www.cher.ubc.ca/cyclingincities/survey.html

2 Hunt and Abraham (2007).

Page 151 of 247

Duncan Area Active Transportation Plan

R Separated on-street facilities offer physical or spatial separation within the roadway corridor. Facility types include cycle tracks and buffered bicycle lanes. R Bicycle lanes/shoulders are the most common bicycle facility type, providing a separate travel lane for cyclists. R Shared roadways are facilities where cyclists share a single lane of traffic with automobiles, either side-by-side or queuing.

1.6.3 Roadway Context

Context describes conditions on the roadway. Many roadway factors impact the experience of cycling; automobile speeds and volumes, presence of heavy vehicles, trucks, or transit vehicles, roadway width, visibility, adjacent land uses, and urban or rural context all contribute to the context of a bikeway. While all these factors are important, the major indicators of the context are automobile speed and volume. In addition, urban or rural context affects engineering treatments appropriate on a particular roadway. Roadway classification indicates many of these context issues and provides guidance for what types of bikeway facilities are appropriate. Roadway widths may vary by type, but the following general widths are recommended. Width may be varied based on factors such as presence of frequent transit service and heavy truck traffic:

Page 152 of 247

Design Guidelines

1.6.4 Bicycle Facility Typologies

These elements are combined to provide a typology for bicycle facility selection, as illustrated below.

Bicycle Facility Classification The following continua show the range of bicycle facilities that can be used on roads by classification. Engineering judgment, traffic studies, previous municipal planning efforts, community input and local context should be used to refine facility recommendations for a particular street. In some corridors, it may be desirable to construct facilities to a higher level of development than those recommended in this plan to enhance user safety and comfort. For example, in areas where a paved shoulder is the recommended facility type, there may be an opportunity to build a separated multi-use trail, providing greater separation from the roadway. In other

Page 153 of 247

Duncan Area Active Transportation Plan cases, the recommended level of separation is not warranted by motor vehicle speeds and volumes, and a lesser treatment may be acceptable.

Design Guidelines

12 Page 154of247

Duncan Area Active Transportation Plan

13 Page 155of247

Design Guidelines

14 Page 156of247

Duncan Area Active Transportation Plan

15 Page 157of247

Design Guidelines

16 Page 158of247

Duncan Area Active Transportation Plan

17 Page 159of247

Design Guidelines

18 Page 160of247

Figure 1. Bikeway Facility Continuum: Local Streets( with or without curb &g utter) Duncan Area Active Transportation Plan

1.7 Bicycle and Pedestrian Facility Reference

1.7.1 On-Street Bicycle Facilities

Facility Type Example Discussion Design Summary Guidelines

Cycle tracks provide space that is One-way: 1.5-2m track width exclusively or primarily for bicycles, 0.5 -1.0 m buffer zone width and are separated from motor vehicle travel lanes, parking lanes and Two-way: 2.5-3.5m track width CRD Section 1.5.1 sidewalks. Cycle tracks provide the 1-3m buffer zone width following benefits: Improve visibility at intersections NACTO p 58-104 Alta Planning + Increased comfort for bicyclists Separation options: pavement Design Fewer conflicts between bicycles and markings/ colouring, bollards, curbs/ CROW Guide parked cars as cyclists ride outside medians or a combination Cycle Track the door zone Sign with TAC sign IB-23 Vélo Québec Buffered bike lanes increase the space between the bike lanes and the travel lane or parked cars. Buffered bike lanes provide: 1.5-2.0m Bicycle lane width Greater separation between cyclists and 0.5-1.0m Buffer width motor vehicles Green paint can be used to increase Additional space for cyclists to avoid visibility and highlight that the space door openings is intended for bicycle use CRD Section 1.5.2 Space for cyclists to pass one another Use only where posted speeds do not NACTO p 18-30 Buffered without encroaching into the travel exceed 100km/hr City of Portland, Bicycle Lanes lane Sign with TAC sign RB- 90 OR

19 Page 161of247

Design Guidelines

Facility Type Example Discussion Design Summary Guidelines

Bicycle lanes are separated from vehicle travel lanes. Bicycle lanes can Recommended width: 1.8 m increase safety and improve road user Min width : 1.4m etiquette by: Where volumes > 6,000 AADT or if Defining road space for bicyclists and trucks >10% of traffic volumes: 2.0 m CRD Section 1.6.2 motorists If speed >=100 km/h on rural highways: NACTO p 4-17 2.5 m Discouraging cyclists from riding on the TAC Geometric sidewalk Use a bicycle symbol and diamond Design & Standard Reminding motorists that cyclists have symbol Bikeway Traffic Bicycle Lane a right to the road Sign with TAC sign RB- 90 Control Min: 1.5 m wide recommended; 1.2 m accepted If speed ≥ 70 km/h and volumes >5,000 Shoulder bikeways are paved AADT: 2.0 m roadways with striped shoulders wide If speed ≥80 km/h and volume >10,000 enough for bicycle travel. Shoulder AADT: .2.5 m bikeways are appropriate in rural areas on roads without curbs and Highways: 3.0 m preferred CRD Section 1.6.1 gutters. They can discourage parking May use “Share the Road” sign (TAC BC MOTI on the side of the roadway if signed WC-47 & WC-47S) and/or “Bike TAC Geometric Shoulder and enforced. Separated pedestrian Route” signs (TAC sign IB-23) Design Sections Bikeway pathways may also be provided. May include pavement markings 3.4.3.2 & 3.4.6.2

Use on roads with speeds < 60 km/h and lane widths >4.0m Place marking 3.5 m min from face of curb on streets with on-street Wide curb lanes are marked with parking or >1.0 m from face of curb high-visibility shared lane markings on streets without on-street parking (“sharrows”), which help position Place markings after an intersection, 10 bicyclists within the travel lane. These m before the end of the block, and at CRD Section 1.7.1 markings are often used on streets intervals <75 m NACTO p 273-287 where dedicated bicycle lanes are Sign with ”Share the Road” signs (TAC TAC Bikeway Marked Wide desirable but are not feasible due to signs WC-47 & WC-47S); and “Bike Pavement Curb Lane physical or other constraints. Route” signs (TAC sign IB-23) Markings

20 Page 162of247

Duncan Area Active Transportation Plan

Facility Type Example Discussion Design Summary Guidelines

Designated ‘shared routes’ are bikeways where cyclists and motorists Min width for unmarked parking/travel physically share a standard travel lane: 4m lane, often with insufficient space for Sign with “Bike Route” signs (TAC sign the automobile to pass a cyclist IB-23) without merging into the opposite Can include pavement markings, CRD Section 1.7.2 lane. They are indicated with signs wayfinding, or ‘Share the Road” signs TAC Geometric Shared Lane and few other treatments. (TAC WC-47 & WC-47S) Design Use “Bike Route” (TAC sign IB-23)and wayfinding signs Use shared lane markings Neighbourhood bikeways (“bicycle Use traffic calming treatments to CRD Section 1.7.3 boulevards” or “local street maintain low speeds (< 50 km/h). NACTO p 239-254 bikeways”) are low-volume streets Treatments include speed humps, and pending where motorists and bicyclists share traffic circles, curb extensions, etc. Alta Planning + the same space. Use traffic diversion to maintain low Design and IBPI Basic treatments include pavement motor vehicle volumes (<3,000 vpd, – Bicycle markings and signs. Traffic calming ideally <1,500 vpd). Boulevard and diversion treatments can also be Minimize delay for bicyclists and Design Guidebook Neighbour- used to reduce vehicle speeds or provide safe and convenient street hood bikeway volumes. crossings. City of Berkeley

21 Page 163of247

Design Guidelines

1.7.2 Intersection Design Guidelines

Facility Type Example Discussion Design Summary Guidelines

Bike boxes allow bicyclists to move to the front of the traffic queue on a red light and proceed first when that signal turns green. Motor vehicles must stop behind the white stop line at the rear of the bike box. Bike boxes are used Minimum depth: 2.75 m. to reduce conflicts between right- Recommended depth: 4.0 m deep to turning motorists and cyclists allow for bicycle positioning. continuing straight through the Right turns on red should be CRD Section 1.6.2.8 intersection. prohibited. NACTO p 106-121 Bike Boxes

Bicycle lane pocket min width: 1.2 m; Coloured bicycle lanes can be 1.5 m preferred CRD Section 1.6.2.10 extended through the Use coloured pavement through NACTO p 254-272 bicycle/vehicle conflict zone (e.g., entire merge area TAC Coloured Bike Coloured Bicycle at intersections or merge areas) to Dashed lines can be used to indicate Lanes Portland Lanes at Conflict increase visibility and warn that automobiles are crossing the Office of motorists to expect bicyclists. bicycle lane Transportation Areas The shared bicycle/right turn lane places a standard-width bicycle lane on the left side of a dedicated right turn lane. A dashed strip Min shared lane: 3.7 m delineates the space for bicyclists and motorists within the shared Min pocket bicycle lane: 1.2 m; 1.5 m CRD Section 1.6.2.9 lane. This treatment includes preferred NACTO p 181-109 signage advising motorists and Shared lane markings can indicate TAC Coloured Bike bicyclists of proper positing within cyclists’ route Shared Bicycle/ Lanes Simulator the lane. Colouration can be used (see above) Testing Report Right Turn Lane

22 Page 164of247

Duncan Area Active Transportation Plan

Facility Type Example Discussion Design Summary Guidelines

All demand-responsive signals, particularly those along designated bikeways, should be capable of detecting bicyclists and CRD Section 3.8 -3.9 pedestrians. Signal enhancements Pedestrian phases can be triggered can include audible and with automatic signals or push NACTO p 204-237 countdown signals and leading buttons ITE Guidance for Bicycle and pedestrian intervals bicycle Bicycle actuation includes loop Bicycle—Sensitive Pedestrian Traffic detection/and or push buttons. detectors, cameras, and push- Detection and buttons Counters Signals Research indicates that while 25 mph maximum circulating design single-lane roundabouts may speed. benefit bicyclists and pedestrians AASHTO. (2012). Design approaches/exits to the by slowing traffic, multi-lane Guide for the lowest speeds possible. roundabouts may present greater Development of challenges and significantly Signing to encourage bicyclists Bicycle Facilities. increase safety problems for these navigating the roundabout like TRB. (2010). motor vehicles to “take the lane.” users. Roundabouts: An Provide separated facilities for Informational Accommodating Truck apron can provide adequate bicyclists who prefer not to Guide, Second Edition. Bicyclists at clearance for longer vehicles. navigate the roundabout on the Roundabouts roadway NCHRP 672

23 Page 165of247

Design Guidelines

Pedestrian Facilities

Facility Type Example Discussion Design Summary Guidelines

Sidewalks provide an area for pedestrian travel that is separated Sidewalk zone clear widths: from vehicle traffic. Sidewalks are o Local roads: 1.5 m min typically constructed out of o Major roads: 1.8 to 2.4 m concrete and are separated from o Highways and downtown roads: the roadway by a curb or gutter 2.4 to 3.7 m Duncan OCP Bylaw and sometimes a landscaped 8.4.5 and o Increase by 0.5 m+ where boulevard. Appendix 6 Sidewalk clear width is exclusive of sidewalks are curb-tight or near hospitals and nursing homes CRD Section 2.2 the curb and obstructions. Planting strip: 1.2 m on highways; 0.4 TAC Geometric Recommended widths enable two m on major roads Design Guide pedestrians to walk side-by-side or to pass each other comfortably. Sidewalk surfaces should be smooth United States and continuous Access Board Sidewalks Marked crosswalks improve visibility of pedestrians crossing the street and direct pedestrians to Intersection frequencies: optimal crossing locations. o 60 – 90 m where blocks are Crosswalk enhancements can longer than 120 m improve visibility through high- o Generally not more frequent than CRD Section 3.1 visibility markings, flashing lights, 45 m advance warning signs, or a raised TAC Geometric o median. At long intersections, Do not prohibit for more than Design Guide reduce crossing distance with curb 120 m MoTI Pedestrian ramps and minimize vehicle Use zebra striping to increase Crossing Control visibility, such as at a school Manual Marked Crosswalks turning radii.

24 Page 166of247

Duncan Area Active Transportation Plan

Facility Type Example Discussion Design Summary Guidelines

Duncan OCP Appendix 6 North Cowichan OCP p. 158 Every ramp should have a landing at the top and at CRD Section 3.6 Curb ramps allow all users to make the bottom and be flush Standards Council of the transition from the street to with the pavement Canada the sidewalk. A sidewalk without a Ramp slope1:10 min; 1:15 TAC Geometric curb ramp can be useless to preferred Design Guide someone in a wheelchair, forcing Cross slope no more than Curb Ramps (let- them back to a driveway and out 1:20, with 1:50 preferred. United States Access Board downs) into the street for access.

Curb extensions minimize CRD Section 3.3 Extend across the parking lane; stop pedestrian exposure by shortening 30 cm short of the parking zone to Standards Council of crossing distance and give provide a space for bicyclists Canada pedestrians a better chance to see TAC Geometric and be seen before committing to Can be used on one crossing or both Design Guide crossing. They can be used as bus Provides space for pedestrian Curb Extensions stop locations to improve safety amenities, plantings, and bio United States swales Access Board (curb bulbs) for transit riders.

Median refuge islands help Use where the cross-street is >15 m improve safety by providing a wide or >4 travel lanes space for pedestrians and cyclists Can be used where distance is less to to wait while crossing, allowing CRD Section 3.3 users to gauge safe crossing of one increase available safe gaps. Standards Council of direction of traffic at a time. They Use at signalized or unsignalized Canada also act as traffic calming by crosswalks narrowing lanes and can be used Make accessible, preferably with an TAC Geometric to divert motor vehicle traffic, as in at-grade passage through the Design Guide Pedestrian Refuge a neighbourhood greenway island rather than ramps and United States treatment. landings Access Board Islands

25 Page 167of247

Design Guidelines

Facility Type Example Discussion Design Summary Guidelines

Accessible bus stops ensure that all Min:1.28 m wide x 2.4 m to 3.525 m people can use the bus system. On Maintain 2.1 m by 1.98 m clear for the routes where bi-directional service transit stop-waiting pad to is provided (as opposed to a loop accommodate wheelchair ramp route), an accessible inbound stop deployment from the bus and to should correspond to nearby allow for wheelchair movement accessible outbound stop. A stop after clearing the ramp should not be deemed fully Provide 1.5 m wide paved CRD Section 2.3 accessible until this can be connections from waiting pad to BC Transit Municipal the sidewalk Systems Program Transit Stop Guidelines achieved.

1.7.3 Multi-Use Trail Design Guidelines

Facility Type Example Discussion Design Summary Guidelines

Multi-use trails serve bicyclists and pedestrians and provide attractive routes away from other roadways and/or connecting to major destinations. Elements that enhance Min for 2-way multi-use trail: 3.0 multi-use trail design include: m (only recommended for low traffic situations) Providing frequent access points with directional signs directing users Min desired:.4.0 m CRD Section 4.2 Provide 60 cm+ shoulder on both Limiting the number of at-grade BC Parks Trail sides; clear vegetation well crossings with streets or driveways and Design and beyond that distance to providing crossing treatments to Construction maintain sight lines reduce delay and increase safety Standards Clearance to overhead Manual Whenever possible, and especially where obstructions: 2.5 m min, 3.6 m heavy use can be expected, separate FHWA. Designing recommended Sidewalks and General Multi-Use bicycle and pedestrian ways should be Trails for Access Min design speed: 30 km/h Trails provided to reduce conflicts

26 Page 168of247

Duncan Area Active Transportation Plan

Facility Type Example Discussion Design Summary Guidelines As cycling and walking increase in popularity, conflicts can arise between faster-moving bicyclists and slower bicyclists, as well as pedestrians and CRD Section 4.2.1 other users. To mitigate these issues, High concentrations of multiple BC Parks Trail provide a separate (adjacent) users: .6.0 m+ recommended Design and Construction pedestrian path, stripe a centerline, Stripe a centerline to divide Standards and/or post trail etiquette signage. Trail users capacity is based on expected use (e.g., Manual Provide a separate ped. path destinations served and population FHWA. Designing adjacent to the main path adjacent to the trail), terrain, and types Sidewalks and High-Use Trails of users expected. Post trail etiquette signs Trails for Access

Width: 30 to 90 cm In locations where environmental Maintain clear area of 30 cm+ on sensitivity or the characteristics of the CRD Section 4.2.2 either side of trail trail environment do not make a paved BC Parks Trail trail appropriate, many options exist for Avoid grades in excess of 12% to Design and soft-surface trails. Soft surfaces such as minimize erosion Construction gravel and dirt are less jarring on the Surface with gravel/crusher fines, Standards Soft surface Trails joints than concrete. bark chip/mulch, or native soil Manual

Also known as “side paths,” trails along roadways must be well-designed to Avoid constructing trails directly maximize safety. Half of the bicyclists adjacent to roadways where ride against the normal flow of motor possible or is space is vehicle traffic, but motorists entering or insufficient to provide a crossing the roadway may not expect sufficient buffer traffic coming from that direction. Cars Provide a1.5 m min buffer on cross-streets or driveways trying to between the trail and the CRD Section 4.2.6 turn or cross the main street may block roadway edge or install a

Trails along roadways trail crossings. physical barrier AASHTO

27 Page 169of247

Design Guidelines

Facility Type Example Discussion Design Summary Guidelines

At-grade trail/roadway crossings generally fit into categories based on amount of separation from traffic and trail user visibility: CRD Section 4.3 o Marked/unsignalized unprotected crossings TAC Bikeway Traffic Control o Marked/enhanced Guidelines While at-grade crossings create a unsignalized intersections potentially high level of conflict BC Parks Trail o Route users to existing between trail users and motorists, well- Design and signalized intersection designed crossings have not Construction o Signalized/controlled Trail/Roadway historically posed a safety problem for Standards o Manual Crossings trail users. Grade-separated crossings

1.7.4 Wayfinding Standards and Guidelines Facility Type Example Discussion Design Summary Guidelines

Regulatory signs indicate the traffic regulations which apply at a specific time or place. TAC signs WC-47 and Warning signs indicate conditions that will normally require caution and may require a WC-47S should be used reduction in speed. in shared lanes CRD Section 5 Use TAC Sign IB-23 “Bike MUTCD-C Guide and information signsindicate information for route selection, for locating Route” on all bikeways TAC Bikeway On-Street Traffic off-road facilities, or for identifying TAC sign RB-91 is used to Traffic Control Control Signs geographical features or points of interest. indicate bicycle lanes Guidelines

28 Page 170of247

Duncan Area Active Transportation Plan

Wayfinding signs help users find the best bicycle route to their destinations. Benefits Sign key destinations of wayfinding signs include: including: other on-street bikeways, commercial Passively marketing the network by centres, parks and trails, providing unique and consistent imagery public transit hubs, and Helping address misperceptions about time other civic and and distance community destinations On-Street Visually cueing to motorists that they are Use TAC and MUTCD-C Duncan OCP 6.2.6 Wayfinding driving along a bicycle route and should use standards for signs along Signs caution the roadway CRD Section 5.1.2

Directional signs provide orientation to the trail user and emphasize trail continuity. Signage style and Street names should be called out at all trail imagery should be intersections with roadways. Users’ rights consistent to provide a and responsibilities of trail usage should be sense of continuity, stated at main trail access points. orientation, and safety CRD Section 5.1.1 Interpretive signs enrich the trail user Where possible, experience, focus attention on the unique incorporate signs into CVRD Parks and Multi-Use Trail attributes of the local community, and vertical elements such as Trails Master Plan Section 7.6 Signs provide educational opportunities. bollards

1.7.5 Maintenance and Construction Facility Type Example Discussion Design Summary Guidelines

29 Page 171of247

Design Guidelines

Safety of all roadway users should be Efforts should be made to provide CRD Section considered during road construction bicycle access via a separated path 7.1 and repair. Only in rare cases should or signed shared lane TAC Bikeway pedestrians and bicyclists be Do not obstruct t bicyclists’ or Traffic Control detoured to another street when peds’ paths with construction Guidelines travel vehicle lanes remain open. signs Contractors performing work for MoTI Traffic Duncan should be made aware of Use signs indicating “share the Control Manual for the needs of bicyclists and be lane” or “single file” as appropriate Access Work on properly trained in how to safely Minimize or mitigate obstructions Through Roadways Construction route bicyclists and pedestrian in the travel way and sign as through or around work zones. appropriate Worksafe BC Areas

Minimize barriers for peds., particularly with mobility and sensory impairments, by providing Sidewalk damage primarily occurs a level surface with min of 7 mm due to tree roots. See sidewalk grade changes accessibility standards for guidelines on mitigating surface damage. It is Tree well grates can be used, but particularly critical that the interface grates shall have openings no between a curb ramp and the street greater than 15 mm in width be maintained. Winter snow removal Trim tree limbs to leave at least 2.5 Sidewalk on pedestrian routes should be a m of clear space above the CRD Section Maintenance priority. sidewalk 7.2 Establish a seasonal sweeping schedule that prioritizes roads with major bicycle route Shoulders and bike lanes can fill with Maintain an even surface on bike gravel, broken glass and other routes; check for compaction and debris. In addition, cyclists are more settlement and use the smallest sensitive to subtle changes in chip seal possible when CRD Section roadway surface than motor maintaining roads. 7.3 vehicles. Maintaining a relatively MUTCD-C smooth pavement surface Provide bicycle-safe drainage grates significantly benefits cyclists. Snow TAC Bikeway Bikeway should be cleared from bike facilities Maintain signs, repaint stripes, and Traffic Control when the roadway is plowed. cut back vegetation regularly Guidelines Maintenance

30 Page 172of247

Page 173 of 247

Duncan Area Active Transportation Plan

Page 174 of 247

The following is a summary of comments received at the Duncan Area Active Transportation Plan Open House held on June 12 & 13 at the Cowichan Aquatic Centre. Respondents were asked to provide their feedback on the draft Plan so that more effective policies can be created. The City is asking that the Municipality of North Cowichan consolidate these results with the responses from earlier public consultation and have the maps updated to reflect this new information. The City is unable to make changes on its own as it does not have access to the GIS software necessary to update the maps.

The summary of comments received at these Open Houses and through the Active Transportation Plan survey have indicated a number of priority areas within the Study Area boundary. The following comments are summarized by topic for convenience.

CYCLING NETWORK

SAFETY

‐ Silver Bridge has been identified as a priority for safety improvements for cycling infrastructure. Several comments suggest that the Bridge is too narrow for both vehicles and cyclists to use together. Respondents would like to see a specific bridge or path constructed for cyclists. ‐ The stretch of Government Street between Kenneth Street and Hemlock Avenue is also considered dangerous according to a number of cyclists. Narrow lane widths and traffic congestion along this section of Government Street are considered problems by cyclists who use the Street. ‐ The left turn lane from Trunk Road to Allenby Road has been identified as a particularly dangerous intersection for cyclists. ‐ The intersection and surrounding areas at Coronation Avenue and the Trans‐Canada Highway have been highlighted for their unsafe conditions for both cyclists and pedestrians. There is very little space for cyclists and motorists to share the road at this location, leading to dangerous conditions for both. ‐ A significant area of concern for both cyclists and pedestrians

SIGNAGE

‐ Signage was identified as another top priority of cyclists that responded to the survey. In particular, the signage for bicyclists and motorists at roundabout locations is of particular concern. Cyclists are more likely to take issue with a lack of signage, but it is important to make sure that effective signs are communicating the proper information to all user groups.

Connectivity

‐ There needs to be a web of interconnecting bike lanes ‐ Close down Craig Street to vehicles (pedestrians and cyclist access only) Page 175 of 247

Summary of Open House Comments and Surveys – June 12 & 13, 2014 Duncan Area Active Transportation Plan

‐ Bike lane on either Coronation Ave. or Trunk Rd. to connect Downtown Duncan with the east side of the Trans‐Canada Highway. ‐ Widen Government Street to Herbert /street

I would rather see alternatives to the traditional concrete sidewalks. People with visual challenges/Parkinson’s Disease have difficulty seeing the edge of the sidewalk.

People who run prefer a softer, smoother, more even surface than the road or sidewalk can usually afford. Prioritize redesign of Canada Avenue and Trunk Rd – consider the idée of a one‐way couplet system for Canada Ave and Duncan St.

Re‐prioritize the Item #36 (bike lane from along Trunk Rd. from T.C.H. – make a medium‐term to long‐ term goal

PEDESTRIANS

‐ People with Fibromyalgia and arthritis have difficulty walking on the concrete sidewalks. ‐ People who run prefer a softer surface, where people can run for longer and be more comfortable while doing so ‐ Prioritize sidewalk project #6 (widening of sidewalk along Jubilee Street between Evans and 2nd Streets ‐ Extend trails onto Cowichan Tribes land (i.e. off Tzouhalem Road; also the other side of the Cowichan River across Silver Bridge. ‐ Provide a continuous pedestrian path along Canada Avenue from 4th Street to the roundabout. ‐ Improve connectivity between paths behind the Public Works yard and along the dikes. ‐ Install a crossing/make the crossing safer across the TCH to safely go from Cowichan Secondary/Cowichan Aquatic Centre, to the east side of TCH ‐ Areas of concern: very narrow space for cyclists and cars to share the road at Coronation and TCH (the east side of Coronation in particular is very unsafe for cyclists and pedestrians. ‐ Bike lane along either Coronation Avenue of Trunk Road to connect the Downtown area of Duncan with the east side of the TCH. Currently these stretches of road are dangerous for cyclists as they are congested and narrow, making it difficult for cyclists to share the road with motorists. These routes are identified as important because they provide an uninterrupted path for cyclists which would help improve connectivity between residential neighbourhoods and the services provided in the Downtown area. ‐ I would rather see alternatives to traditional concrete sidewalks. This idea may not be feasible as alternative materials can be more costly than traditional concrete and don’t often last as long. A study might be required to determine the feasibility of using alternative materials. ‐ Move the crosswalk located at the Gibbins Road roundabout. The current position of the crosswalk is dangerous to cyclists and pedestrians as it is in the blind spot of motorists as they enter and exit the roundabout. If moving the location of the crosswalk is not feasible, better signage could be employed to make drivers more aware of the crosswalk.

Page 2 of 3

Page 176 of 247

Summary of Open House Comments and Surveys – June 12 & 13, 2014 Duncan Area Active Transportation Plan

‐ Several sections of sidewalk near Duncan Manor are dangerous for seniors and those with mobility issues. Replacement of the paving stones in this location was mentioned by several respondents as an easy way of improving the sidewalk in the area. ‐ Widen the sidewalk on the west side of Government Street between Gibbins Road roundabout and Cairnsmore Street. A safer pedestrian route along Lakes Road from Beverly Street and Roome Road was also highlighted as an important project.

Page 3 of 3

Page 177 of 247

Information Only Report

To: Committee of the Whole File No: 6100-20 Date: September 2, 2014 From: Operations Manager Re: Exercise Equipment at Centennial Park

RECOMMENDATION: That Committee of the Whole receive the September 2, 2014 report by the Operations Manager for information.

BACKGROUND: Unless staff is directed otherwise, staff will proceed in the following manner regarding the exercise equipment at Centennial Park:

A pad, with concrete border and rubber exercise surface, will be placed north of the washroom building between the path to Third Street and the Jubilee Gardens, with plans for a second to be installed further toward the pond also beside the walking path. They will both be large enough to allow for two pieces of equipment; the abdominal crunch/leg lift, and the chest/back press at the first station, the stretch and the assisted row to be installed on the second station. It is anticipated that although the first station can be constructed within the 2014 budget of $25,000.00, there won’t be enough money to entirely complete a second station this year so any remaining funds will be allocated towards further equipment and stations planned for 2015.

Station 1, behind washroom building Construct concrete pad $5,837.28 Rubber surface mats $900.00 Ab crunch/leg lift $2,690.00 Chest/back press $5,840.00 Total estimated cost $15,267.28

Station 2, north of Jubilee Gardens beside trail Construct concrete pad $5,837.28 Rubber surface mats $900.00 Stretch $3,865.00 Assisted row/push up $2,530.00 Total estimated cost $13,132.28

Total 2014 Budget $25,000.00

Page 1 of 2 Page 178 of 247

Exercise Equipment at Centennial Park Update – September 2, 2014

ATTACHMENTS:

Attachment A – HealthBeat 2014 Pricing

Respectfully submitted,

______Len Thew, Operations Manager Reviewed by CAO

Page 2 of 2 Page 179 of 247 HealthBeat® 2014 Pricing

Model # Product Name Price (each)

161314 Ab Crunch/Leg Lift $2,690

161316 Assisted Row/Push-Up $2,530

161315 Balance Steps $3,420

161312 Cardio Stepper $7,280

161309 Chest/Back Press $5,840

177722 Mobility $4,075

161317 Plyometrics $3,420

161313 Pull-Up/Dip $2,765

161311 Tai Chi Wheels $3,105

177723 Stretch $3,865

161310 Squat Press $5,840

161437 Welcome Sign $1,155 Page 180 of 247

Request for Decision

To: Committee of the Whole File No: 0340-50 Date: September 2, 2014 From: Karen Robertson, Director of Corporate Services Re: Code of Conduct Policy

RECOMMENDATION: That the following recommendation be forwarded to Council for approval:

That the Code of Conduct Policy, as attached to the September 2, 2014 report by the Director of Corporate Services, be adopted;

And That the Workplace Harassment, Racism, and Personal use of Public Works Yard Facilities, Tools & Equipment Policies be repealed.

BACKGROUND: Each year, Auditor General for Local Government (AGLG) selects local governments to conduct audits on in the following areas: 1) achieving value for money in operational procurement; 2) local government performance in managing policing agreements and policy budget oversight; and 3) learnings from local government capital procurement projects and asset management programs. In April, 2014, the first audit reports were published and within that report it was recommended that in order to effectively manage actual or perceived conflict of interest, municipalities should have comprehensive clear guidelines on conflict of interest, as well as code of conduct, to guide ethical behavior for Council, staff and volunteers working on behalf of the local government. With the upcoming election, staff felt it was timely to introduce this policy with the anticipated goal of providing it to those who plan on running for office so candidates have an understanding of the principles associated with the proper operation of democratic local government. The policy covers pertinent aspects of the Community Charter, and Common Law as it relates to conflict of interest in public duty, disclosure of pecuniary interest (direct and indirect), expenses and allowances, gifts, volunteerism, and handling of privileged information. As part of the Council orientation with the newly elected Council in the fall, additional training would be provided on conflict of interest at which time a copy of this policy would also be distributed and reviewed in further detail. ATTACHMENTS:

Proposed Policy: Code of Conduct Policy Proposed Policies for Repeal: Racism, Workplace Harassment, & Personal Use of Public Works yard Facilities, Tools & Equipment

Respectfully submitted,

Karen Robertson, Director of Corporate Services Reviewed by CAO Page 1 of 1 Page 181 of 247

COUNCIL POLICY MANUAL

POLICY: Code of Conduct SECTION: ADMIN APPROVAL DATE:

GOAL To set minimum expectations for the behavior of Council, staff and Committee members in carrying out their functions.

SCOPE: All City Council, staff and Committee Members.

DEFINITIONS:

CAO” means the Chief Administrative Officer.

Committee Member: means a person sitting on an advisory committee, task force, commission, board, or other Council-established body.

Confidential Information: means information that could reasonably harm the interests of individuals or organizations, including the City of Duncan, if disclosed to persons who are not authorized to access the information.

Conflict of Interest: means a situation in which a person has a private or personal interest sufficient to appear to influence the objective exercise of their official duties at the City of Duncan.

Council: means the Mayor and Council members.

Immediate Relative: means a spouse (including common-law spouse), parent, parent-in- law, child, brother, sister, brother-in-law or sister-in-law, grandparent, grandparent-in-law, grandchild.

Officer: means a person appointed by Council under the “Appointment of Officer’s Bylaw.”

Staff: means an employee or contractor of the City of Duncan and includes an Officer.

City of Duncan Code of Conduct/Conflict of Interest Policy: Current Page 1 of 17 Page 182 of 247

POLICY STATEMENTS:

1. Key Principles

1.1 Integrity: Council, staff and Committee members are keepers of the public trust and must uphold the highest standards of ethical behaviour. Council, staff, and Committee members are expected to: • make decisions that benefit the community; • act lawfully and within the authorities of the Community Charter and Local Government Act; and • be free from undue influence and not act, or appear to act, in order to gain financial or other benefits for themselves, family, friends or business interests.

1.2 Accountability: Council, staff, and Committee members are obligated to answer for a responsibility that has been entrusted to them. They are responsible for the decisions that they make. Decision-making processes must be transparent and subject to public scrutiny. Proper records are kept and audit trails are in place.

1.3 Responsibility: Council, staff and Committee members must act responsibly, within the law and within the authorities of the Community Charter and Local Government Act. They are to observe the Code of Conduct. This means disclosing actual or potential conflict of interests relating to their public duties and taking steps to resolve the conflict for the protection of the public interest; following the letter and spirit of policies and procedures; and exercising all conferred power strictly for the purpose for which the powers have been conferred.

1.4 Leadership: Council, staff and Committee members must demonstrate and promote the key principles of the Code of Conduct through their decisions, actions and behaviour. Their behaviour must build and inspire the public’s trust and confidence in local government.

1.5 Respect: Council, staff and Committee members must conduct public business efficiently, with decorum and with proper attention to the City’s diversity. They must treat each other with respect at all times. This means not using derogatory language towards others, respecting the rights of other people, treating people with courtesy and recognizing the different roles others play in local government decision making.

1.6 Openness: Council, staff and Committee members have a duty to be as open as possible about their decisions and actions. This means communicating appropriate information openly to the public about decision-making processes and issues being considered; encouraging appropriate public participation; communicating clearly; and providing appropriate means for recourse and feedback.

2. General Conduct

2.1 Council, staff and Committee members must adhere to the key principles and provisions of the Code of Conduct.

2.2 Council, staff and Committee members must act lawfully and within the authorities of the Community Charter and Local Government Act, and exercise a reasonable degree of care and diligence in carrying out their functions. City of Duncan Code of Conduct/Conflict of Interest Policy: Current Page 2 of 17 Page 183 of 247

2.3 Council, staff and Committee members have an obligation to consider issues consistently and fairly.

2.4 Council, staff and Committee members must avoid behaviour that could constitute an act of disorder or misbehaviour. Specifically, Council, staff and Committee members must avoid conduct that:

 Contravenes the law, including the BC Human Rights Code, the Community Charter and Local Government Act, City Bylaws, associated regulations, and City policy;  Is an abuse of power or otherwise amounts to discrimination, intimidation, harassment, verbal abuse, or the adverse treatment of others;  Prejudices the provision of a service or services to the community.

2.5 When making decisions, Council, staff and Committee members must consider all relevant facts, opinions and analyses of which they should be reasonably aware.

2.6 Council, staff and Committee members are obliged to question any request made of them that they think may be unethical or unlawful.

2.7 Staff and Committee members must carry out their duties in a manner that allows City Council members and the public to remain informed about local government activity and practices.

2.8 Should there be uncertainty about the ethical issues around a conduct or decision, Council, staff, and Committee members should consider the following:

 Is the conduct decision lawful?  Is the conduct or decision consistent with City policy, Council’s objectives and the Code of Conduct?  Will the outcome of the decision or conduct provide a private benefit for the individual, family, friends, or business interests?  Can the decision or conduct be justified in terms of the public interest and would it withstand public scrutiny?

3. Handling of Information

3.1 Council, staff and Committee members must:

 Protect information that is specifically marked confidential and other material understood to be confidential in nature;  Refrain from discussing/disclosing any Confidential Information with/to other staff, or with persons outside the organization except as authorized;  Take reasonable care to prevent the examination of confidential material by unauthorized individuals;  Not use Confidential Information with the intention to cause harm or detriment to Council or any other person or body;  Only access information needed for City business;  Only use Confidential Information for the purpose it is intended to be used;

City of Duncan Code of Conduct/Conflict of Interest Policy: Current Page 3 of 17 Page 184 of 247

 Only release information in accordance with established City policies and procedures and in compliance with the Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act;  Not disclose decisions, resolutions or report contents from an in-camera meeting of Council until a corporate decision has been made for the information to become public; and  Not disclose detail on Council’s in-camera deliberations or specific detail on whether individual Councillors voted for or against an issue.

3.2 Except in the normal course of duties, Council, staff and Committee members must not in any way change or alter City records or documents.

3.3 When dealing with personal information, Council, staff and Committee members must comply fully with the provisions of the Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act. All reasonable and necessary measures must be taken to ensure that the personal or private business information of individuals is protected. Personal information is information or an opinion about a person whose identity is apparent, or can be determined from the information or opinion.

4. Conflict of Interest

Council, staff and Committee members are expected to make decisions that benefit the community. They are to be free from undue influence and not act or appear to act in order to gain financial or other benefits for themselves, family, friends, or business interests.

A conflict of interest exists when an individual is, or could be, influenced, or appear to be influenced, by a personal interest, financial (pecuniary) or otherwise, when carrying out their public duty. Personal interest can include direct or indirect pecuniary interest, bias, pre-judgment, close-mindedness or undue influence.

Council, staff and Committee members must appropriately resolve any conflict or incompatibility between their personal interests and the impartial performance of their public or professional duties in accordance with statutory requirements. When considering whether or not a conflict of interest exists, it is important to consider whether there are any grounds for a reasonable person to think that a conflict exists.

4.1 Conflict of Interest for Council:

4.1.1 Public Duty and Private Interests

 Section 100 of the Community Charter set out requirements with respect to conflict of interest, including procedures mandated for disclosure of such interests and matters relating to the acceptance of gifts, the use of insider information and disclosure of contracts. These requirements apply to Council. The common law interprets and applies the law in respect of conflict of interest.

 Council must fully inform themselves of the statutory requirements in respect of conflicts, and of the related common law, and must comply with all requirements. In the event of a conflict or perceived conflict, Council members must seek legal advice.

 Your overriding duty as a Councillor is to all of the residents of the City of Duncan. City of Duncan Code of Conduct/Conflict of Interest Policy: Current Page 4 of 17 Page 185 of 247

 Whenever you have, or any member of your family has, a private or personal interest in any question which Councillors must decide, you must not do anything to let that interest influence the decisions.

 You shall:

a) Declare to Council at the first opportunity your interests, or known interests of any close relatives, in any enterprise which proposes to transact business with the municipality; b) make no effort whatsoever to influence Council or Staff in any decisions on the matter; c) leave the place of the meeting prior to discussions and vote on the subject, and; d) of course - not vote on the matter.

 Do nothing as a Councillor which you could not justify to the public.

 It is not enough to avoid actual impropriety; you should at all times avoid any occasion for suspicion or the appearance of improper conduct.

 As each matter comes before Council, each member should decide for themselves whether they have a specific property, business or financial interest, direct or indirect, which could be affected to the benefit or detriment of the member, their family or associates. If they do, they should then decide whether the effect would be a personal benefit to them, a family member, or associate as opposed to an effect on the community as a whole. If it would not affect the whole community, but would have a similar effect on a majority of, or substantial number of persons in the community with similar interest, then acting on the matter would probably not result in a conflict of interest.

4.1.2 Disclosure of Pecuniary and Other Interests

The law makes specific provision requiring you to disclose pecuniary interest, direct and indirect. But interests which are not pecuniary can be just as important. Kinship, friendship, membership of an association, religion, partisanship, institutional or ethnic interests and so forth can sometimes influence your judgment and give the impression that you might be acting for personal motives. A good test is to ask yourself “would a reasonably well informed elector think there was a conflict.” If you think they would, or if you are in doubt, disclose the interest and withdraw from the meeting unless you are specifically invited to stay.

A recent Court of Appeal decision found that Council members who may sit as directors of a nonprofit society would be in a pecuniary conflict of interest if they vote or participate in matters related to the society at the Council table – even when there if no direct financial benefit anticipated or provided to the director because society directors have a fiduciary duty to the society.

City of Duncan Code of Conduct/Conflict of Interest Policy: Current Page 5 of 17 Page 186 of 247

The principles about disclosure of interest should be borne in mind in your unofficial relations with other Councillors on informal or social occasions no less scrupulously than at formal meetings of Council, its Committees or Sub-Committees.

4.1.3 Membership & Chairing of Council Committees and Sub-Committees

You, or a firm or body with which you are personally connected, may have professional business or personal interests within an area for which the Council is responsible; such interests may be substantial and closely related to the work of one or more of the Council's Committees or Sub-Committees. Example include: planning or developing land, personnel matters or the letting of contracts for supplies, services or works.

Before seeking or accepting membership of any such Committee or Sub-Committee, you should seriously consider whether your membership would involve you:

a) in disclosing an interest so often that you could be of little value to the Committee or Sub-Committee, or; b) in weakening public confidence in the impartiality of the Committee or Sub-Committee.

You should not seek or accept the Chairmanship of a Committee or Sub- Committee whose business is closely related to a substantial interest or range of interests of yourself or of anybody with which you are associated.

4.1.4 Councillors and Officers

Both Councillors and Officers are servants of the public, and they are indispensable to one another. But their responsibilities are distinct. Councillors are responsible to the electorate and serve only so long as their term of office lasts. Officers are responsible to the Council and are permanently appointed. An Officer's job is to give advice to Councillors and Council as a whole, and to carry out the Council's work under the guidance of policies and direction of Council and the control of the CAO.

Mutual respect between Councillors and Officers is essential to good local government. Close personal familiarity between individual Councillors and Officers can damage this working relationship and prove embarrassing to other Councillors and Officers.

4.1.5 Expenses and Allowances

There are rules entitling you to claim expenses and allowances in connection with your duties as a Councillor. These rules should be scrupulously observed and outlined in the Travel Expense Policy.

4.1.6 Use of Council Facilities

Make sure that any facilities – such as transport, stationery, or administrative support services – provided by the Council for your use in your duties as a Councillor are strictly for those duties and for no other purpose.

City of Duncan Code of Conduct/Conflict of Interest Policy: Current Page 6 of 17 Page 187 of 247

4.1.7 Undue Influence

Do not use your position to secure special privileges, favours or exemptions for yourself or any other person.

4.1.8 Conduct After Leaving Office

For a period of twelve months after leaving office, abide by these guidelines except those related to confidential information which shall apply in perpetuity, or until public release of such information as authorized by Council.

4.2 Conflict of Interest for Appointees to Committees, Commissions & Boards:

It is essential that Council, in its deliberations and in its conduct of municipal affairs, should have available to it the wisdom, expertise, experience and advice of competent members of the community. It is also essential that members of such Committees be seen to act with integrity to ensure a continued confidence in the process by the citizenry.

In most cases, the advice and guidance of such persons is sought because they have practical experience and special knowledge in the areas of endeavour covered by the mandate of the particular Committee on which they are invited to serve and generally will have business and property interests in those fields of endeavour.

But it is essential and is a matter of law that such members not allow themselves to become involved in conflict of interest situations. More information can be obtained from Corporate Services.

A member of a Committee stands as a trustee for the local community and they are not to vote or to deal so as to gain or appear to gain private advantage out of matters over which they are asked to comment and advise.

 Your overriding duty as a member of a Committee is to all residents of the City of Duncan.

 Whenever you have, or any member of your family has, a private or personal interest in any question on which you must advise, you must not do anything to let that interest influence the advice.

 It is not enough to avoid actual impropriety; you should at all times avoid any occasion for suspicion or the appearance of improper conduct.

 As a Committee member you often acquire information that has not yet been made public. It is a grave betrayal of trust to use confidential information for personal advantage of yourself or anyone known to you.

 You must not communicate information designated confidential to anyone not entitled to receive it.

 Do not use your position to secure special privileges, favours or exemptions for yourself or any other person.

City of Duncan Code of Conduct/Conflict of Interest Policy: Current Page 7 of 17 Page 188 of 247

 As each matter comes before a Committee, each member should decide for themselves whether they have a specific property, business or financial interest, direct or indirect, which could be affected to the benefit or detriment of the member, their family or associates. If they do, they should then decide whether the effect would be a personal benefit to themselves, a family member or associates as opposed to an effect on the community as a whole.

If it would not affect the whole community, but would have a similar effect on a majority of, or substantial number of persons in the community with similar interests, then acting on the matter would probably not result in a conflict of interest.

Such a financial business or property interest would include an interest as an advocate or lobbyist whether the member was being paid for his services or not. It would be difficult to conceive of a situation where such advocacy would not result in a conflict of interest. Therefore, a member should always withdraw and take no part whatsoever to influence the Committee on any question if they have been engaged to influence in any way the decision on that question. They should always declare such an interest.

If a member does have such an interest as noted above, they should declare it to the Committee Chair as soon as possible.

If it is personal, the member should:

a. leave the place of a meeting;

b. take no part in the discussion;

c. do nothing to influence the other members of the Committee (directly, indirectly or through others);

d. not vote; and,

e. take no part in drafting any reports of the Committee insofar as they relate to that particular matter.

If it is deemed to be a community interest they should continue to act as a member of the Committee. It may be that a member has business or property interests which, for sound business or other reasons, it would be imprudent to declare at that time. Therefore, because secrecy, no matter how prudent, can give rise to suspicion in others, the member should proceed as though for the time being at least his interest is personal - even if when it becomes public knowledge it would be clearly a community interest.

In summary, before seeking or accepting membership on any Council-appointed Board, Committee or Commission, an individual should seriously consider whether such membership would involve the individual:

 in disclosing an interest so often that they would be of little value to the Committee, Commission, or Board, or  in weakening public confidence in the impartiality of the Committee, Commission or Board.

City of Duncan Code of Conduct/Conflict of Interest Policy: Current Page 8 of 17 Page 189 of 247

4.3 Conflict of Interest for Staff:

4.3.1. Impartiality and Equality of Service:

A staff member shall carry out their duties with integrity, impartiality and equality of service to the general public.

4.3.2 Preferential Treatment:

A staff member shall not go beyond their official duty to assist those dealing with the City where this would result in preferential treatment.

4.3.3 Outside Remuneration:

If approved, a staff member may be permitted to engage in outside employment, carry on business or receive public funds for personal activities provided that it does not place demands inconsistent with their job, or jeopardize their objectivity, and in particular that:  it does not interfere with the performance of their work;  if does not represent a conflict of interest as herein set out;  they do not have an advantage derived from their employment;  work is not performed in such a way as to appear to be an official act;  it does not involve the use of City premises, time, services, equipment, information or supplies when they have access to by virtue of their employment with the City; and  That it is does not discredit or disadvantage the City or City Council.

Before a staff member engages in outside employment or business, the staff member shall make a written request to the CAO. The CAO will consider whether the employment is deemed to be inappropriate or present a high probability of the existence of a conflict. On approval, the CAO shall forward a copy of same to members of Council.

4.3.4 City Materials, Equipment and Facilities:

A staff member shall not use, or allow the use of, City materials, equipment and facilities for personal use unless specifically approved by policy or otherwise.

4.3.5 Property (Land):

A staff member shall not deal in property directly or indirectly within the City other than his/her personal residence without first informing the CAO, in writing.

A staff member shall declare to the CAO, in writing, their interest direct or indirect, in any property which is subject to a rezoning proposal or subdivision within the City.

City of Duncan Code of Conduct/Conflict of Interest Policy: Current Page 9 of 17 Page 190 of 247

4.3.6 Private Interests:

A staff member shall declare to the CAO, in writing, any personal or corporate interest held directly or indirectly by the staff member or by an immediate relative of the staff member in a contract or a proposed contract with the City, or in any enterprise which proposes to transact business with the City.

For the purposes of this Section:

“indirectly” means through any other person, including a company, trustee or immediate relative.

4.3.7 Undue Influence:

Do not use your position to secure special privileges, favours or exemptions for yourself or any other person.

4.3.8 Post-Employment Behaviour:

Former Officers of the City who have provided advice to the City on ongoing, specific matters may not switch sides by acting for another employer on the same matter.

4.3.9 Reporting of Conflict of Interest:

A staff member shall report to the CAO any conflict of interest or potential conflict of interest of which they are aware involving them, their family, or any other staff member of the City.

The CAO shall report to the City Council any conflict of interest or potential conflict of interest of which they are aware involving them, their family, or any other staff member of the City.

A staff member must fully disclose to their supervisor or the CAO any direct or indirect pecuniary interest or any bias or undue influence with respect to any matter they are dealing with as soon as practicable. The supervisor must advise the CAO as soon as practicable.

5. Gifts and Personal Benefits

5.1 What are gifts and personal benefits?

5.1.1 Gifts and personal benefits are items or services of value that are received by Council members, staff, or Committee members for their personal use. Gifts and personal benefits include, but are not limited to cash, gift cards, tickets to events, jewelry, pens, food or beverages, discounts/rebates on personal purchases, free or subsidized drinks or meals, entertainment, and invitations to social functions organized by groups or community organizations.

City of Duncan Code of Conduct/Conflict of Interest Policy: Current Page 10 of 17 Page 191 of 247

5.1.2 The following are not considered to be gifts or personal benefits for the purposes of this policy:  Compensation authorized by bylaw or policy;  Reimbursement for out-of-pocket costs incurred for authorized travel, living and accommodation expenses associated with attendance at an event; and  A lawful contribution made to a Council member who is a candidate for elections conducted under the Local Government Act.

5.2 What gifts and personal benefits may and may not be accepted?

5.2.1 Council members, staff, or Committee members must not, directly or indirectly, accept a gift or personal benefit that is intended to influence the performance of their respective official duties related to the City of Duncan.

5.2.2 Council members may accept gifts and personal benefits received as an incident of protocol or social obligations that normally accompany the responsibilities of elected office.

5.2.3 Staff, or Committee members may accept a gift or personal benefit that meets both of the following criteria:  It has a value of $50 or less, and  Is received as an incident of protocol or as a City representative on activities such as speaking engagements, technical presentations, business meetings and social obligations reasonably related to their role with the City of Duncan.

5.2.4 Notwithstanding section 5.2.2 and 5.2.3, Council members, staff, or Committee members must never accept a gift of cash (for the purpose of this policy, gift cards constitute cash).

5.2.5 Notwithstanding section 5.2.2 and 5.2.3, Council members, staff, or Committee members must never accept a gift or personal benefit that could reasonably be expected to result in a real or perceived conflict of interest as set out in Section 4 to this policy.

5.2.6 Council members, staff, or Committee members must take all reasonable steps to ensure that their immediate relatives do not receive gifts or personal benefits that could appear to an impartial observer to be an attempt to subvert this policy or to influence or secure a favour from the Council member, staff, or Committee member.

5.3 How must gifts and personal benefits be reported?

5.3.1 As per Section 106 (1) of the Community Charter, Council members must disclose to the Director of Corporate Services any gift or personal benefit they have accepted that is valued at more than $250 or the total value of such gifts and benefits received directly or indirectly from one source in any 12 month period exceeding $250.

5.3.2 Where a disclosure is required, it must be filed with the Director of Corporate Services as soon as practicable, using the forms designated for this purpose. The disclosure must include:

City of Duncan Code of Conduct/Conflict of Interest Policy: Current Page 11 of 17 Page 192 of 247

 The name of the individual in receipt of the gift or personal benefit;  A description of the gift or personal benefit, estimated value, and date that it was received;  The source of the gift or personal benefits (if from a corporation, the full names and addresses of the CEO/Executive Director and at least 2 individuals who are directors);  The circumstances under which the gift or personal benefit was given and accepted; and  The final disposition of the gift or personal benefit.

5.3.3 Council members, staff, or Committee members in receipt of gifts or personal benefits that they do not wish to accept have the option of immediately relinquishing the gift or personal benefit to the City. If not relinquished immediately, a disclosure form will be required.

5.3.4 Responsibility for relinquishing of gifts and personal benefits and filing of the disclosure form lies solely with the recipient of the gift.

5.4 How are gifts and personal benefits valued?

5.4.1 For the purposes of this policy, the value of each gift or personal benefit shall be determined by its replacement cost, i.e. how much would it cost to replace the item?

5.4.2 Where the value for the gift or personal benefit is unclear, the Director of Corporate Services shall determine its value.

5.5 How are the relinquished gifts managed and disposed of?

5.4.1 The Director of Corporate Services will maintain records of all gifts and personal benefits received, including disposition.

5.4.2 Any gifts or personal benefits that have been received in contravention of this policy must be turned over to the Director of Corporate Services immediately for safekeeping or disposition, and are the property of the City.

5.4.3 At the Director of Corporate Services’ discretion, such gifts may be disposed of as follows:  Returned to the donor;  Displayed in individual offices, general offices, or in the public areas of City Hall;  Disposed of by donation, sale or auction, with any proceeds credited to the City’s general revenues or to the direct or indirect support of charitable organizations.

City of Duncan Code of Conduct/Conflict of Interest Policy: Current Page 12 of 17 Page 193 of 247

Quick reference guide on gift acceptance and disclosure policy:

What Can be Accepted What Must be Disclosed Council May accept any gift or personal benefit - Must disclose individual items related to protocol or social obligations worth more than $250 related to elected official duties. - Must disclose multiple items from one source where the No defined dollar limit. total value exceeds $250 in a calendar year Staff & Committee May accept gift or personal benefit if  Must disclose multiple items members related to a protocol event or such from one source where the activities as speaking engagements and total value exceeds $50 in a business meetings and valued at less calendar year. than $50. Gifts and personal benefits may never be accepted by elected officials, staff or Committee members when:  In the form of cash or gift card  Acceptance of the item could reasonably be expected to result in a real or perceived conflict of interest  The gift or benefit is intended to influence the member’s performance or their official duties

Council, staff and committee members have the option to not accept the gift or personal benefit and relinquish it immediately to the Director of Corporate services without disclosure.

6. Interactions of Council, Staff and Committee members

6.1 Council is the governing body of the City of Duncan. It has the responsibility to govern the City in accordance with the Community Charter, the Local Government Act, Council’s Procedure Bylaw and other legislation.

6.2 Council must act in accordance with Council’s Procedure Bylaw and the conduct guidelines outlined in this policy.

6.3 Council members are to contact staff according to the procedures outlined in the Council Communications Policy whereby inquiries are to be directed to the CAO or Directors. Direct access to staff within a department is at the CAO’s discretion.

6.4 Where a Council member inquiry of a Director may, in the opinion of the CAO, result in more than a few hours’ work or may involve sensitive matters, the Council official must obtain the approval of the CAO or City Council.

6.5 Council members must not direct or influence, or attempt to direct or influence any staff or Committee member in the exercise of their duties or functions.

6.6 Council members are not to contact or issue instructions to any of the City’s contractors, tenderers, consultants or other service providers.

6.7 Council members must not make public statements attacking or reflecting negatively on City of Duncan staff or invoke staff matters for political purposes.

6.8 Council members are to direct requests for working papers or preliminary drafts of reports to the CAO. The CAO may point out controversial or confidential aspects of the document, and may stress that the document may not represent the final position of staff.

City of Duncan Code of Conduct/Conflict of Interest Policy: Current Page 13 of 17 Page 194 of 247

6.9 The CAO is responsible for the efficient and effective operation of the City organization and for ensuring the implementation of the decisions of Council.

6.10 Staff are expected to:  Give their attention to the business of the City while on duty;  Ensure that their work is carried out efficiently, economically and effectively;  Provide Council with information sufficient to enable them to carry out their civic functions;  Carry out lawful directions given by any person having authority to give such directions; and  Give effect to the lawful policies, decision and practises of Council, whether or not the staff member agrees with or approves of them.

6.11 Staff should seek the advice and approval of their Director prior to responding to a direct request from Council member, except where the request is minor or of a day- to-day operational nature.

6.12 Staff are to provide information and professional advice through regular City processes and are not to lobby Council members on any matter.

6.13 Staff must not make public statements attacking or reflecting negatively on the City of Duncan, City Council, individual Council members or staff.

6.14 Directors are to be equally helpful to all members of Council, and should avoid close alliance, or the appearance of close alliance, with any particular member. Information and advice is to be provided as requested, within the limitations of this document.

6.15 Significant information provided to any member of Council, which is likely to be used in Council or in political debate, should also be provided to all other Council members, and to the CAO.

6.16 Committee members must act in accordance with the relevant sections of Council’s Procedure Bylaw and the conduct guidelines outlined in this policy.

6.17 Committee members must not direct or influence, or attempt to direct or influence, any staff in the exercise of their duties or functions except where such direction or influence is necessary to fulfill the specific mandate of the advisory body.

6.18 Committee members must not make public statements attacking or reflecting negatively on the City of Duncan Council, individual Council members or staff.

7. Volunteerism

Council members should refrain from doing any volunteer work for the municipality or for one of its agencies, boards, or committees. A Council member is often perceived as being in a dominant position as a member of a board or committee. Impartial review of their own work would be difficult, and it can be very awkward for other committee members to critique the work of the Councillor. When a Councillor volunteers to do to the work it effectively neuters any suggestion that someone else (paid or otherwise) might be more effective, as it would be unlikely that staff or committee members would be comfortable suggesting someone else for fear of slighting the Councillor. In addition, by allowing work to be performed by a Council member who “volunteered” to do the work the municipality would not be in a position to bring action for non-performance. City of Duncan Code of Conduct/Conflict of Interest Policy: Current Page 14 of 17 Page 195 of 247

8. Breaches, Complaint Handling and Disciplinary Action

8.1 Council

8.1.1 Alleged breaches of this Code of Conduct by a Council member shall be submitted in a written complaint addressed to the Mayor and the CAO within six (6) months of the last alleged breach. In the event that the Mayor is the subject of, or is implicated in a complaint, the complaint shall be addressed to the Deputy Mayor.

8.1.2 Upon receipt of a complaint under Section 8.1.1, the Mayor or Deputy Mayor and CAO shall, within thirty (30) days, appoint an independent third party identified and agreed between the Complainant(s) and Respondent(s) as having the necessary professional skills, knowledge and experience to investigate the complaint (the “Third Party Investigator”). The Third Party Investigator:

8.1.2 (a) May conduct a preliminary assessment of the complaint, at the conclusion of which the Investigator may determine to continue the investigation or make a written recommendation that the complaint be dismissed as unfounded, beyond jurisdiction or unlikely to succeed;

If the Third Party Investigator determines to continue the complaint, the Third Party Investigator shall:

8.1.2 (b) Conduct an independent and impartial investigation of the complaint in a manner that is fair, timely, confidential and otherwise accords with the principles of due process and natural justice;

8.1.2 (c) Provide a confidential investigation update within ninety (90) days of their appointment to the Mayor or Deputy Mayor (as applicable), the CAO, the Complainant and the Respondent;

8.1.2 (d) Provide a written, confidential report (the “Report”) of the findings of the investigation, including findings as to whether there has been a breach of this Code of Conduct to the Mayor or Deputy Mayor (as applicable), the CAO, the Complainant and the Respondent;

8.1.2 (e) Provide recommendations in the Report as to the appropriate resolution of the complaint, which recommendations may include:

 dismissal of the complaint; or  public censure of a Council member or members for misbehavior or a breach of this Code of Conduct; and/or  a requirement that a Council member or members apologize to any person adversely affected by a breach of this Code of Conduct; and/or  counselling for a Council member or members; and/or  such other recommendations as are deemed appropriate in the professional judgment of the Third Party Investigator.

City of Duncan Code of Conduct/Conflict of Interest Policy: Current Page 15 of 17 Page 196 of 247

8.1.3 The Director of Corporate Services will receive and retain all Reports prepared under Section 8.1.2 (c) & (d).

8.1.4 Where a Councillor alleges a breach of this Code of Conduct by a fellow Councillor, all Council shall refrain from commenting on such allegations at meetings of Council.

8.2 Committee Members

8.2.1 Alleged breaches of this Code of Conduct by Advisory Body Officials shall be submitted in a written complaint addressed to the Mayor and CAO within six (6) months of the last alleged breach.

8.2.2 The Mayor shall consider alleged breaches of this Code of Conduct by Committee members, direct that any enquiries they consider appropriate or desirable be undertaken, and recommend appropriate disciplinary action to Council.

8.2.3 the Mayor may recommend that Council take any actions provided for in the Code of Conduct that the Mayor considers reasonable in the circumstances.

8.2.4 Where Council finds that an Committee member has breached this Code of Conduct, Council may decide by resolution to:

 Censure the Committee member for misbehaviour; and/or  Require the Committee member to apologize to any person adversely affected by the breach; and/or  Counsel the Committee member; and/or  Terminate the Committee member’s appointment; and/or  Implement such other measures as Council deems appropriate.

8.3 City Staff and Contractors:

8.2.1 Alleged breaches of this Code of Conduct by Staff or Contractors shall be reported in writing to a Director or CAO.

8.2.2 Breaches of this Code of Conduct by staff party to collective agreements will be handled through existing collective agreements subject to any grievance and arbitration processes. These mechanisms include the ability for the City to take appropriate disciplinary action up to and including dismissal.

8.2.3 Breaches of this Code by exempt staff will be handled through existing processes and in accordance with current employment law. The Directors and/or the CAO review the alleged breaches, make any necessary inquiries and determine appropriate disciplinary action.

8.2.4 Consequences associated with breaches of this Code of Conduct by Contractors are incorporated into the contracts under which they are retained, and will be dealt with in accordance with the conditions outlined therein.

City of Duncan Code of Conduct/Conflict of Interest Policy: Current Page 16 of 17 Page 197 of 247

RELATED POLICIES:

Council Policy Date: Respectful Workplace (Discrimination, 2014-JAN-20 Harassment & Bullying Prevention Policy) Council Communications 2013-DEC-16 Council-CAO Covenant 2013-AUG-19 Travel Expense Policy 2013-OCT-21

City of Duncan Code of Conduct/Conflict of Interest Policy: Current Page 17 of 17 Page 198 of 247

COUNCIL POLICY MANUAL

POLICY: Workplace Harassment SECTION: HUMAN RESOURCES APPROVAL DATE: August 10, 1998

GOAL

This policy has been developed in order to

a) demonstrate and promote the commitment of the City of Duncan (hereinafter called the "City") to the human rights and equality issues; b) aid in the prevention of harassment and discrimination in the workplace; c) provide a standard and consistent process to address and resolve complaints; d) ensure that every valid complaint is regarded as a serious matter and dealt with in a confidential, objective and timely manner, while respecting the rights of all parties; e) establish a basis upon which training can be provided for the purpose of:  promoting general awareness of human rights and equality issues  providing human rights information  teaching investigative techniques f) ensure compliance with the British Columbia Human Rights Act.

SCOPE: All persons under the direction of the City have a responsibility to respect the dignity and human rights of their co-workers and the public they serve, as well as to expect compliance with the British Columbia Human Rights Act. The City prohibits harassment in the workplace.

This policy applies to all employees, management staff, elected officials, contractors, volunteers and members of the public in their dealing with the City. In support of this policy, the City will endeavour to educate and inform those persons under the direction of the City of their rights and responsibilities.

Appropriate disciplinary measures may be imposed against any person under the direction of the City for a breach of this policy.

POLICY: It is the policy of the City that every employee has the right to work in a harassment-free environment and, to that end, the City is committed to creating and maintaining a work environment which is free of harassment and discrimination.

GUIDELINES:

1. Policy Application

This policy shall not affect the right of the City to manage its business, direct its workforce or implement employment and performance practices. Complaints involving such issues shall be resolved through the union grievance process, as outlined in the collective agreement City of Duncan Current Policy: Workplace Harassment, contd. Page 1 of 4 Page 199 of 247

applicable to the employees of the City.

2. Definitions:

a) age b) race, colour, ancestry, national or ethnic origin c) criminal or summary conviction offense (that is unrelated to employment) d) political belief e) religion f) marital status g) family status h) disability (physical or mental) i) sex (including sexual harassment and pregnancy) j) sexual orientation

WORKPLACE includes:

a) all locations where the business of the City is conducted b) other locations, provided the incident complained of, impacts on work relationships, status or environment, including (but not limited to) unwelcome phone calls or visits to a person’s home by a person under the direction of the City.

HARASSMENT:

a) Discrimination and harassment related to conduct based on, or motivated wholly or in part by any of the prohibited grounds contained in the British Columbia Human Rights Act and are illegal behaviors. b) It is an offensive comment(s) and behavior(s) that demean and belittle an individual and/or cause personal humiliation.

WORKPLACE HARASSMENT:

It is any action, conduct, comment, gesture or contact in the workplace, whether intended or not, based on any prohibited ground that is likely, on a reasonable basis:

a) To cause offence or humiliation to any person, or b) To be perceived as placing an improper condition on employment, benefits, training or promotional opportunities, work assignments or compensation, or c) To create an environment that is hostile, intimidating or offensive d) Harassment may result from either one incident or a series of incidents and may be directed to either specific individual(s) or group(s).

PERSONAL HARASSMENT:

a) It is behavior by any person under the direction of the City which is personally offensive to another person and jeopardizes that person’s job or undermines their work performance. b) It is an abuse of authority by any person under the direction of the City which undermines another person’s position through intimidation, threats, blackmail, coercion or favoritism.

SEXUAL HARASSMENT:

a) This is defined as unwelcome behavior and/or comments of a sexual nature by a person under the direction of the City, which detrimentally affects the working City of Duncan Current Policy: Workplace Harassment, contd. Page 2 of 4 Page 200 of 247

environment, such as creating an intimidating, hostile or offensive working environment. b) It can be an unwanted sexual advance, which consists of an abuse of authority in that it includes or implies a threat and/or reprisal which will adversely affect the complainant or have adverse job-related consequences after the sexual advance is rejected.

3. Confidentiality

In order to protect the privacy and reputation of all parties involved in a complaint, all information concerning the harassment complaint, up to and including the final decision, shall remain confidential, subject to the privacy rules of the Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act or any other course of action available through common law or statute.

NO records of a complaint will be placed in the personnel file of a Respondent involved in a complaint unless the remedies involve disciplinary action.

4. Responsibilities

CITY ADMINISTRATOR:

a) Will confidentially provide general advice and assistance to all parties to a complaint and provide specific guidance and direction to managers and supervisors in all matters relating to harassment and discrimination, including:  Informal problem solving  Complaint preparation  Mediation  Investigation  Corrective action  Will coordinate the training and education process with the Human Resources Department of the Cowichan Valley Regional District pursuant to this policy.

MANAGERS AND SUPERVISORS:

Are obliged by law to create and maintain a harassment-free workplace. They are responsible for ensuring that harassment is not allowed, condoned or ignored and for dealing promptly and responsibly with a situation, once aware of the alleged harassment.

ANY PERSON WHO HAS THE AUTHORITY TO PREVENT OR DISCOURAGE HARASSMENT MAY BE HELD RESPONSIBLE FOR FAILING TO DO SO.

COMPLAINANT:

a) Refers to the person lodging the harassment complaint. b) Shall report the complaint within one year (Section 17 of the Human Rights Act) of the facts complained of, unless the delay incurred in good faith and no substantial prejudice will result to any person affected by the delay. c) Shall protect the privacy of the Respondent.

RESPONDENT:

a) Refers to the person against whom the complaint is being lodged. b) Shall protect the privacy of the complainant.

INVESTIGATORS: City of Duncan Current Policy: Workplace Harassment, contd. Page 3 of 4 Page 201 of 247

a) Shall be a team consisting of one management employee and one included employee who has received training in Investigating Harassment Complaints. b) Shall initiate an investigation within three (3) working days of receiving a complaint. c) Shall report their findings and recommendations to the Adjudicator within one (1) month of receiving the complaint.

ADJUDICATOR:

a) Shall be the City Administrator of the City and/or the City Solicitor. b) Shall prepare and issue a final report within ten(10) working days of receiving the investigator's recommendations.

5. Rights

COMPLAINANT:

a) Has the right to confidential, timely and appropriate action being taken on their behalf. b) Shall be advised of the remedy applied to the complainant.

RESPONDENT:

Has the right to a confidential, timely and unbiased investigation, with a full opportunity to respond to all allegations.

INVESTIGATORS:

Have the authority, pursuant to this policy, to speak with anyone, examine any documents and enter any work locations which are relevant to the complaint.

City of Duncan Current Policy: Workplace Harassment, contd. Page 4 of 4 Page 202 of 247

COUNCIL POLICY MANUAL

POLICY: Racism SECTION: ADMINISTRATION APPROVAL DATE: March 16, 2001

GOAL The City of Duncan is dedicated to the elimination of racism.

POLICY:

The City intends to lead by example and will take action against racism by actively:

 Promoting institutional policies and practices that eliminate racism  Promoting harmonious relationships among the diverse populations of the Cowichan Valley  Promoting diversity in the leadership of key community institutions  Promoting "zero tolerance" of overt acts of racial discrimination.

Page 1 of 1 Page 203 of 247

COUNCIL POLICY MANUAL

POLICY: Personal Use of Public SECTION: HUMAN RESOURCES Works Yard Facilities, APPROVAL DATE: October 14, 1986 Tools & Equipment

POLICY:

THAT as policy, Members of Council and all employees (Non-Union and Union) be prohibited from using the Public Works Yard facilities, tools and equipment for personal use.

Reconsidered March 14 & 28, 1988 with no change in policy.

City of Duncan Current Policy: Personal Use of Public Works Yard Facilities, Tools & Equipment Page 1 of 1 Page 204 of 247

Request for Decision

To: Committee of the Whole File No: 1970-03 Date: September 2, 2014 From: Talitha Soldera, Director of Finance Re: Permissive Tax Exemption Bylaw

RECOMMENDATION: That the following recommendations be forwarded to Council for approval:

That Council deny the additional exemption (from 25% to 100%) of 0181.0100 – 280 First Street (non-leased area) as requested by the Duncan Housing Society;

And That Council give first three readings to “Permissive Tax Exemption Bylaw 3129, 2014.”

BACKGROUND: Annually, Council must adopt a permissive tax exemption bylaw if it wishes the particular properties to be exempt from property taxation for the following year (2015 in this case). The tax exemption bylaw must be adopted on or before October 31.

The legislation provides for exemptions to be granted to the entirety of particular properties or to portions of those properties. It also allows Council to choose the term of the exemption as long as it does not exceed 10 years.

Typically, exemptions are given on an annual basis. This requires applicants to confirm their circumstances each year so that staff can ensure the organization continues to meet the criteria for a property tax exemption.

ANALYSIS: Multi-Year Exemptions In 2012, Council granted two multi-year tax exemptions in addition to the annual exemptions. These were a five year tax exemption to Duncan Housing Society for 25% of its non-leased area at 280 First Street and a five year 100% tax exemption to the Duncan Christian Reformed Church. The proposed bylaw, attached, suggests providing multi-year exemptions (5 year) for all places of public worship. These properties do not see much change. The property itself does not change in size or use and the activities of the organizations generally do not change. The primary purpose of an annual exemption is to assess each property to ensure it continues to meet eligibility criteria and to allow council the opportunity to consider the amount of exemption to provide to the property. The primary purpose of a multi-year exemption is to provide certainty to an organization so that they can engage in long term planning.

Page 1 of 2 Page 205 of 247

Request for Decision – Permissive Tax Exemption Bylaw – September 2, 2014

Historically, council has provided a 100% property tax exemption to all places of public worship. Providing a multi-year exemption would reduce the amount of work required by staff at City Hall and at each of the organizations each year. If approved, each recipient of a multi-year exemption would be advised that they must provide notification if there are any changes in circumstance during the five year period. The Permissive Tax Exemption Policy also provides for penalties to be imposed on organizations who knowingly breach conditions of their exemption. Additional Exemptions The Duncan Housing Society has asked for a long-term 100% property tax exemption to allow their organization to meet some of their capital requirements in the coming years. The society has made this request for each of the last three years. In 2012, Council provided a five year, 25% exemption to the Society. A 25% exemption of this property equals $5,928 of taxes foregone. If the exemption were increased to 100%, the municipal tax exemption would total $23,711, an increase of $17,783 or 3 times the amount of the exemption each year. This represents almost 0.5% of total municipal taxes for every year the exemption is granted. Due to this significant impact, staff recommend that the current level of property tax exemption be continued. Annual Exemptions All organizations who have requested a property tax exemption are the same as last year.

IMPLICATIONS: Financial: The estimated value of property tax foregone is $70,167. This level of exemption represents 1.7% of total municipal property tax revenue; the same percentage that was foregone for 2014. Policy: Recommendations are consistent with the Permissive Tax Exemption Policy. Strategic Priorities: n/a Sustainability: n/a

ALTERNATE RECOMMENDATIONS: That Committee of the Whole suggest alternative amounts or length of property tax exemptions.

ATTACHMENTS: Proposed Tax Exemptions for 2015 with Comparative Data Permissive Tax Exemption Policy Permissive Tax Exemption Bylaw No 3129, 2014

Respectfully submitted,

Talitha Soldera, Director of Finance Reviewed by CAO

Page 2 of 2 Page 206 of 247

CITY OF DUNCAN

BYLAW NO. 3129, 2014

A Bylaw to Exempt Certain Lands and Buildings from Taxation

WHEREAS Section 224 of Community Charter permits Council, by bylaw, to exempt from taxation certain land and buildings, the lands on which the buildings stand and the lands surrounding certain buildings;

AND WHEREAS such exemptions may be granted to properties such as:

224(2)(a) land or improvements that (i) are owned or held by a charitable, philanthropic or other not for profit corporation, and (ii) the council considers are used for a purpose that is directly related to the purposes of the corporation;

AND WHEREAS such exemptions may also be granted to properties such as:

224(2)(b) land or improvements that (i) are owned or held by a municipality, regional district or other local authority, and (ii) the council considers are used for a purpose of the local authority;

AND WHEREAS such exemptions may also be granted to properties used in relation to those already exempted for buildings used for public worship under Section 220(1)(h), which meet the qualifications as prescribed below:

224(2)(f) (i) an area of land surrounding the exempt building, (ii) a hall that the council considers is necessary to the exempt building and the land on which the hall stands, and (iii) an area of land surrounding a hall that is exempt under subparagraph (ii);

AND WHEREAS such exemptions may also be granted to properties such as:

224(2)(h) in relation to property that is exempt under section 220(1)(i)[seniors’ homes], (j)[hospitals] or (l)[private schools], any area of land surrounding the exempt building.

NOW THEREFORE the Council of the City of Duncan in open meeting assembled, hereby ENACTS AS FOLLOWS:

1. Title

This Bylaw may be cited as the “Permissive Tax Exemption Bylaw No. 3129, 2014.”

2. Administration:

2.1 All properties owned or occupied by a public authority, charitable, philanthropic or other not for profit corporation, listed under Schedule ‘A’ are hereby exempted from taxation for the term of exemption indicated in Schedule ‘A’. Page 207 of 247

Permissive Tax Exemption Bylaw No. 3129, 2014 Page 2 of 6

2.2 All properties owned or occupied by a municipality, regional district or other local authority, listed under Schedule ‘B’, are hereby exempted from taxation for the term of exemption indicated in Schedule ‘B’.

2.3 All properties that receive statutory exemptions and are deserving of additional exemptions for ancillary properties surrounding the exempt buildings, listed in Schedule ‘C’, are hereby exempted from taxation for the term of exemption indicated in Schedule ‘C’.

2.4 Schedules ‘A’, ‘B’ and ‘C’ are attached hereto and form part of this bylaw.

PASSED FIRST READING ______. PASSED SECOND READING ______. PASSED THIRD READING ______.

Notice of intention to proceed with this bylaw was published on the _____day of September 2014 and the ______day of October 2014 pursuant to Sections 94 and 227 of the Community Charter.

ADOPTED ______.

Phil Kent, Mayor

Karen Robertson, Director of Corporate Services

Permissive Tax Exemption Bylaw No. 3129, 2014 Page 3 of 6

Schedule “A” Not-For-Profit Entities – (Section 224(2)(a)) Attached to and forming part of Bylaw No. 3129, 2014

Legal Description Folio Address Owned and Occupied by Plan # Lot # Block # Section Range District PID # Term

0185.0000 5650 Club Road City of Duncan – Occupied 24353 A 17 6 Quamichan 003-010-414 2015 by Duncan Day Care Centre

0061.0200 198 Government City of Duncan – Occupied 44627 A 17 6 Quamichan 005-977-541 2015 Street by Valley Seniors Organization

0626.0001 820 Wharncliffe Road City of Duncan – Occupied 23647 Leased Area over 15/16 7 Quamichan 003-137-643 2015 by Cowichan Pre-School Lot 1 Assoc.

1227.0001 760 Government City of Duncan – Occupied 12568 PT4 Except Plan 8 18 5 Quamichan 004-792-823 2015 Street by Cowichan Lawn Bowling 29453 Club

0181.0100 280 First Street Duncan Housing Society – 29453 Lease Area A 17 & 6 & 5 Quamichan 001-382-217 2015 Portion Occupied by over Lot 1 18 Cowichan Lawn Bowling Club

0087.0001 200 Craig Street City of Duncan – Portion 40864 A 17 6 Quamichan 000-363-774 2015 Occupied by VC Volunteer Cowichan

1052.0001 520-540 Cowichan School District #79 1935 5-8 &11 1 19 5 Quamichan 006-738-001 2015 Cairnsmore Street – Occupied by GTCPS 006-738-010 Growing Together Child & 006-737-994 Parent Society 006-738-028 006-738-044

Undisclosed Undisclosed Cowichan Women Against Undisclosed Quamichan Undisclosed 2015 Violence Society

0190.0000 No address Island Corridor Foundation 1.223 km mainline 17 6 Quamichan None given 2015

Page 208of247

Permissive Tax Exemption Bylaw No. 3129, 2014 Page 4 of 6

0188.0010 No address Island Corridor Foundation Portion shown Red on DD615, except Plan 17 6 Quamichan 009-663-657 2015 260BL, (Railway RW Mile 39.16 to Mile 39.92 Victoria Sub) Exc Leased Portions

0213.0000 121 First Street 468124 BC Ltd. – Portion 798 Leased Area of Lot 3 18 6 Quamichan 008-464-171 2015 Leased (est. 26.67%) by 6 Cowichan Independent Living Resource Society

0920.0000 321 & 331 Canadian Council of the Girl 1182 24 & 25 19 5 & 6 Quamichan 007-816-022 2015 Cairnsmore Street Guide Association 007-816-031

Schedule “B”

Local Authority Entities – (Section 224(2)(b))

Attached to and forming part of Bylaw No. 3129, 2014

Legal Description Folio Address Owned and Occupied by Plan # Lot # Block # Section Range District PID # Term

0188.0050 Canada Avenue Island Corridor Foundation – Lease GCMK 102-0301 R/W Quamichan 009-663-657 2015 Parking Lots Leased to the City of Duncan for a parking and garden area

0188.0011 110 Canada Avenue Island Corridor Foundation – Station Grounds & Buildings within the City of Duncan, Quamichan That part of 2015 Leased to Cowichan Historical That part leased to the City PID# 009- Society 663-657

75.0000 148 Kenneth Street Duncan Elks Association – 2070 85% of Land of Lot A 7 17 6 Quamichan 006-686-575 2015 Leased to the City of Duncan of Lot 12

66.0000 145 Station Street Duncan Elks Association – 2070 85% of Land of Lot B 7 17 6 Quamichan 003-950-115 2015 Leased to the City of Duncan of Lot 12

Page 209of247

Permissive Tax Exemption Bylaw No. 3129, 2014 Page 5 of 6

Schedule “C”

Places of Worship – (Section 224(2)(f))

Attached to and forming part of Bylaw No. 3129, 2014

Legal Description Folio Address Owned and Occupied by Plan # Lot # Block # Section Range District PID # Term

0116.0000 281 Jubilee Street Trustees of the Congregation 2070 8,9,10 12 17 6 Quamichan 006-698-301 2015- of the Duncan United Church 006-698-123 2019 006-698-433

0118.0000 254 Ingram Street Trustees of the Congregation 2070 11 12 17 6 Quamichan 006-698-549 2015- of the Duncan United Church 2019

0192.0000 486 Jubilee Street Anglican Synod of Diocese of 798 1 & 2 1 18 6 Quamichan 006-707-424 2015- BC 2070 14 17 Quamichan 008-462-569 2019 008-462-593

0193.0000 162 First Street Anglican Synod of Diocese of 798 3 1 18 6 Quamichan 008-462-623 2015- BC 2019

0353.0010 463 Ypres Street Bethel Baptist Church 1063 C 4 17 6 Quamichan 008-069-620 2015- Portion DDE20189 2019

0356.0000 483 Ypres Street Bethel Baptist Church 1063 13 4 17 6 Quamichan 008-069-573 2015- 2019

0496.0001 321 Brae Road Christian Brethren of Duncan 43297 2 17 6 Quamichan 003-144-747 2015- 2019

0706.0000 931 Trunk Road Pentecostal Assemblies of 5868 7 2 17 7 Quamichan 000-913-642 2015- Canada Except Plan VIP74593 2019 Only the portion of 1061.0000 531 Herbert Street The Trustees of the VIP 76282 that was Plan 1 19 5 Quamichan 025-818-759 2015- Congregation of St. Andrew’s 30307 1 19 5 Quamichan 2019 Presbyterian Church

1068.0030 1071-1077 Canada Cowichan Valley Congregation 12199 A 19 6 Quamichan 004-972-660 2015- Avenue of Jehovah's Witnesses 2019 Page 210of247 Permissive Tax Exemption Bylaw No. 3129, 2014 Page 6 of 6

Schedule “C” continued

Land Surrounding Statutorily Exempt Properties – (Section 224(2)(h))

Attached to and forming part of Bylaw No. 3129, 2014

Legal Description Folio Address Owned and Occupied by Plan # Lot # Block # Section Range District PID # Term

1040.0000 660 Brownsey Ave. Queen Margaret’s School 2610 1 19 5 Quamichan 006-344-844 2015 Except Plan BL231 BL438 7616

1041.0000 660 Brownsey Ave. Queen Margaret’s School 3773 1 19 5 Quamichan 006-145-809 2015 Except Plan 231BL (73 sq.ft.)

1043.5000 660 Brownsey Ave. Queen Margaret’s School VIP 83377 A 19 5 Quamichan 027-117-693 2015

0872.0000 770 Trunk Road Duncan Kiwanis Village Society 1175 Lot 15 17 7 Quamichan 007-827-202 2015 Except part in Plans 9394, 37661 & 47845 25100 A 17 7 Quamichan 002-868-202

Page 211of247 Page 212 of 247

City of Duncan Proposed Permissive Tax Exemptions for 2015 With Comparative Figures

The estimated dollar value of municipal permissive tax assistance for 2015 is based on an estimate of 2015 tax rates and 2014 assessment values. 2014's tax assistance is based on 2014 rates and values.

Value of Municipal Property Taxes to be Exempted Variance Property Address Owner/Lessee 2015 2014 $ %

One Year Exemptions 660 Brownsey Ave Queen Margaret's School 946 921 25 2.7% 660 Brownsey Ave Queen Margaret's School 578 563 15 2.6% 660 Brownsey Ave Queen Margaret's School 3,041 2,961 80 2.7% 770 Trunk Rd Kiwanis Village Society 5,558 5,412 146 2.7% 5650 Club Rd Duncan Day Care Centre 2,536 2,470 66 2.7% 198 Government St Valley Seniors Organization 6,814 6,635 179 2.7% 820 Wharncliffe Rd Cowichan Pre-School 82 80 2 2.5% 760 Government St Cowichan Lawn Bowling 27 27 0 1.4% 280 First St. Cowichan Lawn Bowling 856 834 22 2.7% 200 Craig St Cowichan Volunteer Society 386 376 10 2.7% 520-540 Cairnsmore St SD # 79 Growing Together 487 474 13 2.8% 321/331 Cairnsmore St Girl Guide Association 1,172 1,142 30 2.7% Undisclosed CWAgainst Violence Society 1,710 1,665 45 2.7% No address Island Corridor Foundation (ICF) 2,224 2,166 58 2.7% No address Island Corridor Foundation (ICF) 663 646 17 2.7% Cowichan Independent Living 121 First Street Resource Society 433 421 12 2.8%

Portion of Canada Ave Parking ICF - Leased to City Lots and Charles Hoey Park 1,862 1,813 49 2.7% ICF - Leased to City - Sublet to Train Station Cowichan Historical Society 2,335 2,273 62 2.7% 148 Kenneth St Duncan Elks - Leased to City 1,927 1,877 50 2.7% 145 Station St Duncan Elks - Leased to City 895 871 24 2.7% Five Year Exemptions 281 Jubilee St Duncan United Church 2,996 2,917 79 2.7% 254 Ingram St Duncan United Church 681 663 18 2.7% 486 Jubilee St Anglican Synod 1,651 1,608 43 2.7% 162 First St Anglican Synod 977 951 26 2.7% 463 Ypres St Bethel Baptist Church 2,830 2,756 74 2.7% 483 Ypres St Bethel Baptist Church 498 485 13 2.7% 321 Brae Rd Christian Bretheren 1,671 1,627 44 2.7% 931 Trunk Rd Pentecostal Assembly 1,418 1,381 37 2.7% 531 Herbert St. Andrews Presbyterian 1,246 1,213 33 2.7% 1071-1077 Canada Ave C.V. Jehovah's Witnesses 3,104 3,022 82 2.7%

51,605 50,248 1,357 2.7% Five Year Exemptions Previously Granted

Duncan Housing Society for 280 First St 2013-2016 5,928 5,772 156 2.7% Duncan Christian Reformed 930 Trunk Rd Church for 2012-2016 12,634 12,302 332 2.7%

70,167 68,322 1,845 2.7% Page 213 of 247

COUNCIL POLICY MANUAL

POLICY: Permissive Tax SECTION: Finance Exemption APPROVAL DATE: August 18, 2014

GOAL The City of Duncan recognizes the significant value of volunteers, volunteer groups and agencies to the spiritual, educational, social, cultural and physical well-being of the community. A permissive tax exemption is a means for Council to support organizations within the community that further Council’s objective to enhance the quality of life while delivering services economically to the citizens of Duncan.

The Permissive Tax Exemption Policy is intended to provide clarity, and consistency to the municipality, the public and prospective applicants.

POLICY: Process Council will consider permissive tax exemption applications annually. Organizations will be required to complete an application each year and supply a copy of the most recent financial statements of the organization, a scale drawing of the property and a copy of the lease agreement if applicable.

Applications must be submitted prior to August 31st of each year to be considered for the next permissive tax exemption year of cycle.

Eligibility Criteria To be eligible for a permissive tax exemption, an organization must comply with all of the eligibility criteria outlined below. The application forms and supporting documentation are an integral part of this policy. There is no obligation on the part of Council to grant permissive tax exemptions in any given year.

The applicant(s): 1. qualifies for an exemption under the provisions of the Community Charter, general authority for permissive exemptions. (Part 7, Division 7, Section 224)

2. and/or the property owner is in compliance with municipal policies, plans, bylaws and regulations (i.e. business licensing, zoning).

3. is a non-profit organization.

Tax exemptions will only be granted to organizations that are a Registered Charity or Non-Profit organization. The intent of this requirement is to ensure that municipal support is not used to further activities of an organization or individual that, if not for its not-for-profit status would otherwise be considered business. City of Duncan Permissive Tax Exemption Policy: Current Page 1 of 3 Page 214 of 247

Non-profit organizations conducting retail and/or commercial activity and charging rates or fees at market value are considered to be in competition with for-profit businesses and will not be eligible for property tax exemption.

4. provides services or programs that are compatible or complementary to those offered by the City of Duncan. When a service or program is offered by a non-profit group or club, the Community may benefit from a more cost effective provision of services.

Services provided by an organization should fulfill some basic need or otherwise improve the quality of life for residents of Duncan.

5. principal use of property meets Council’s objectives. The “principal use of property” refers to the use related directly to the principal purpose of the organization owning or leasing the property.

Permissive tax exemptions will be based on the principal use of the property, not on the non-profit or charitable services of the organization.

6. will provide benefits and accessibility to the residents for Duncan. Specifically, members of the public, within the appropriate age range, are able to join a club or organization and participate in its activities for a nominal rate or fee.

Duncan residents must be the primary beneficiaries of the organization’s services. The services provided on the property must be accessible to the public.

Administration The Finance Department will review all applications for completeness and contact the applicant if additional information is necessary.

The Finance Department will prepare a summary report of applications and the bylaw for presentation to Council, approval and adoption prior to October 31 of each year.

A public notice will be placed in the local newspaper of the proposed bylaw.

Extent, Conditions and Penalties 1. Council may designate a partial exemption of land/improvements where the following circumstances exist: a. a portion of the land/improvements is used by private sector and/or organizations not meeting Council’s exemption criteria. b. the applicant already receives grant in aid from the municipality, provincial or federal government. c. the applicant meets all eligibility criteria, however, Council may, at its discretion, grant a partial exemption.

City of Duncan Permissive Tax Exemption Policy: Current Page 2 of 3 Page 215 of 247

2. Council may impose conditions on the exempted land/improvements with the applicant organization, including but not limited to: a. registration of a covenant restricting use of the property. b. an agreement committing the organization to continue a specific service/program. c. an agreement committing the organization to have facilities open for public use for specific times or a total amount of time. d. an agreement committing the organization to offer use of the facility to certain groups free of charge or at reduced rates. e. an agreement committing the organization to immediately disclose any substantial increase in the organization’s revenue or anticipated revenue (i.e. receives large operating grant from senior government).

3. Council may impose penalties on an exempted organization for knowingly breaching conditions of exemptions, including but not limited to: a. revoking exemption with notice. b. disqualifying any future application for exemption for a specific time period. c. requiring repayment of monies equal to the foregone tax revenue.

City of Duncan Permissive Tax Exemption Policy: Current Page 3 of 3 Page 216 of 247

Information Only Report

To: Committee of the Whole File No: 1700 Date: September 2, 2014 From: Talitha Soldera, Director of Finance Re: Interim Financial Report

RECOMMENDATION: That Committee of the Whole receive the interim financial report for information.

BACKGROUND: The interim financial report shows results to the end of July and includes estimates of remaining revenues and expenditures until the end of the year. This is then compared to the budget.

By the end of July most revenue has either been collected or billed, so figures presented in this interim report are quite accurate. Projected revenues to the end of 2014 are very close to budgeted revenues.

Similarly, operating expenditures are predicted to be close to the figures contained in the budget. The majority of the differences found between projected expenses and budgeted expenses are in the sewer and water funds. This is because the budget is set high enough to cover expenses necessary in the event of an uncontrollable occurrence, such as a water line break. If this occurrence does not happen, the expenditures are less than expected.

It is estimated that the year will finish with a surplus of $129,542 which can be used to offset future expenditures.

Where the projected value at the end of the year differs from the budgeted value by $6,000 or more, a detailed explanation is provided on the attached ‘Interim Report Variance Notes’.

With respect to capital expenditures, the attached report provides an update on projects where relevant information is available, i.e. the project has begun; estimates have been received; the project is complete. Projections for projects that are expected to begin in 2014 but for which no estimates have been received are included in the report but are highlighted.

Total capital expenditures are expected to be less than budgeted due to the timing of some of the projects. Some projects originally scheduled to be undertaken in 2014 will not be able to be undertaken this year.

Page 1 of 2 Page 217 of 247

Request for Decision - Subject – Council Meeting Date

ATTACHMENTS:

Interim Report to Council Operating July 31 2014 Interim Report Variance Notes July 31 2014 Interim Report to Council Capital July 31 2014

Respectfully submitted,

Talitha Soldera, Director of Finance Reviewed by CAO

Page 2 of 2 Page 218 of 247

CITY OF DUNCAN 2014 INTERIM BUDGET REPORT FOR THE PERIOD ENDED July 31, 2014

2012 2013 2013 2013 2014 2014 2014 Budget FINAL BUDGET FINAL YTD YTD Projected BUDGET Variance

TAXATION 3,868,211 3,946,778 3,939,860 3,947,314 4,043,607 4,043,607 4,043,699 92

GRANTS IN LIEU OF TAXES 11,715 10,500 9,894 9,894 9,380 9,380 10,000 620

SALES OF SERVICE 471,762 438,065 451,544 447,082 461,125 498,464 496,668 (1,796)

OTHER REVENUE FROM OWN SOURCES Licences & Permits 105,352 103,700 105,409 88,720 96,321 109,721 106,450 (3,271) Fines 22,923 24,500 35,393 20,583 15,489 26,553 29,500 2,947 Rentals 214,830 230,637 228,576 141,654 133,705 208,494 209,681 1,187 Return on Investment 45,689 45,000 38,484 15,965 5,495 38,000 41,000 3,000 Penalties & Interest on Taxes 73,223 44,500 36,020 22,630 25,262 36,000 36,000 - Other 182,349 161,754 177,562 8,814 18,285 193,493 187,882 (5,611) 644,366 610,091 621,444 298,366 294,557 612,260 610,513 (1,747) TRANSFERS FROM OTHER GOVERNMENTS Unconditional - Provincial 739,607 345,675 345,675 345,675 343,523 345,675 345,675 -

Conditional - Provincial 1,455,316 10,400 8,047 1 0 6,000 6,000 - - Regional 20,018 13,300 13,161 13,161 12,855 12,855 13,306 451 - Federal 57,577 10,000 2,388 41,550 0 5,000 5,000 - 1,532,911 33,700 23,596 54,711 12,856 23,855 24,306 451

COLLECTIONS FOR OTHER GOVERNMENTS 3,738,718 3,836,678 3,893,325 3,893,325 3,920,203 3,920,203 3,996,846 76,643

11,007,290 9,221,487 9,285,338 8,996,367 9,085,251 9,453,444 9,527,707 74,263

Page 1 of 18 Page 219 of 247

2012 2013 2013 2013 2014 2014 2014 - FINAL BUDGET FINAL YTD YTD Projected BUDGET GENERAL GOVERNMENT SERVICES Legislative 106,968 121,755 118,167 64,649 64,284 128,202 129,664 1,462 Administrative 1,120,027 1,200,269 1,228,012 651,501 699,417 1,240,112 1,235,296 (4,816) Other General Government Services 257,151 274,847 170,698 133,627 113,876 251,627 250,605 (1,022) Administration Charges (394,096) (397,212) (397,212) (231,707) (246,329) (422,279) (422,279) -

1,090,050 1,199,659 1,119,666 618,071 631,247 1,197,662 1,193,286 (4,376) PROTECTIVE SERVICES Police Costs 193,350 0 0 0 0 0 0 - Fire Protection 319,261 351,772 319,496 169,964 178,275 352,375 363,506 11,131 Building Inspections 94,826 113,599 94,357 47,832 50,686 106,149 109,300 3,151 Animal & Pest Control 18,478 18,500 18,344 10,804 10,540 18,069 18,500 431 Day and Evening Patrols 46,615 45,750 47,023 27,340 27,121 47,193 46,700 (493) 672,530 529,621 479,219 255,939 266,622 523,786 538,006 14,220 TRANSPORTATION SERVICES Common Services 510,525 540,175 549,861 316,393 310,475 570,587 581,588 11,001 PW Admin Charges (210,725) (213,000) (213,000) (124,250) (168,677) (289,160) (289,160) - Road Transport 413,748 465,196 351,330 148,154 256,708 400,878 411,750 10,872 Cost Recovery Projects 42 0 107 2,394 680 680 (900) (1,580) Street Lighting 87,443 81,500 91,202 44,629 46,724 85,375 87,097 1,722 Traffic Services 99,529 108,500 99,266 30,029 60,396 105,904 106,939 1,035 Parking 96,206 109,565 110,925 64,301 60,630 103,937 107,025 3,088 Public Transit 438 15,000 3,534 1,602 2,184 3,744 15,000 11,256 Equipment Operation & Maintenance 00 0 00 0 0- 997,206 1,106,936 993,225 483,251 569,120 981,945 1,019,339 37,394 ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH SERVICES Comfort Station 23,394 26,335 23,741 14,160 12,987 22,264 25,869 3,605 Environmental Programs 5,319 44,999 4,555 4,000 20,157 45,499 44,999 (500) Other Programs 67 1,000 596 96 0 0 800 800 Garbage Disposal & Collection 149,546 169,500 151,247 78,547 91,585 195,592 220,487 24,895 178,326 241,834 180,138 96,804 124,730 263,355 292,155 28,800

PLANNING AND STUDY PROJECTS 201,434 200,475 138,540 59,531 115,340 200,213 201,790 1,577

RECREATIONAL & CULTURAL SERVICES Joint Facilities 219,668 208,138 227,070 201,139 224,486 235,674 232,638 (3,036) City Parks 388,783 387,800 400,939 220,461 229,169 361,029 406,128 45,099 Cultural Buildings 193,012 207,610 201,869 152,214 163,371 214,721 213,671 (1,050) 801,463 803,548 829,879 573,815 617,025 811,424 852,437 41,013 FISCAL SERVICES Debt Charges - Interest 55,476 50,085 51,251 24,418 24,369 49,107 48,725 (382)

AMORTIZATION OF TANGIBLE CAPITAL ASSETS 793,872 784,316 825,000 825,000 897,124 72,124

TRANSFERS TO OTHER GOVERNMENTS 170,000 175,000 175,000 175,000 180,000 180,000 180,000 -

TAXES COLLECTED FOR OTHER GOV'T 3,725,842 3,823,286 3,880,449 3,880,449 3,907,327 3,907,327 3,983,970 76,643

7,892,327 8,924,316 8,631,683 6,167,277 7,260,780 8,939,819 9,206,832 267,013

Page 2 of 18 Page 220 of 247

2012 2013 2013 2013 2014 2014 2014 Budget FINAL BUDGET FINAL YTD YTD Projected BUDGET Variance EXCESS REVENUES OVER EXPENDITURES 3,114,963 297,171 653,655 2,829,089 1,824,471 513,625 320,875 (192,750)

ADJUST FOR NON-CASH ITEMS - AMORTIZA 0 793,872 784,316 0 825,000 825,000 897,124 72,124

ADJUST FOR CASH ITEMS - NON PSAB Transfer from Own Funds and Reserves 122,485 417,315 383,306 0 0 387,107 387,107 - Prior years surplus 104,046 450,889 201,713 0 0 707,980 707,980 - Contribution to General Capital Fund (646,523) (817,300) (591,736) - - (1,128,509) (1,128,509) - Transfer to Reserves (2,365,939) (982,441) (1,134,769) (733) 0 (1,024,978) (1,024,978) - Transfer Parcel Taxes - Sewer (43,380) (43,500) (43,460) (20) (43,460) (43,460) (43,500) (40) Debt Repayment - Debentures (123,295) (102,615) (102,613) (19,191) (19,604) (103,223) (103,223) -

(2,952,606) (283,780) (503,243) (19,945) 761,936 (380,083) (307,999) 72,084

Change in Financial Equity 162,357 13,391 150,412 2,809,144 2,586,408 133,542 12,876 (120,666)

Use of Surplus ulated Surplus, December 31

Page 3 of 18 Page 221 of 247

2012 2013 2013 2013 2014 2014 2014 Budget FINAL BUDGET FINAL YTD YTD Projected BUDGET Variance TAXATION Real Property % including Policing 2.3% General Purposes 2,873,154 2,934,895 2,929,341 2,935,312 3,006,290 3,006,290 3,006,327 37 Policing Levy 249,983 0 0 0 0 0 0 - Police Bridging Capital (PBC ) Levy 419,166 689,268 687,943 689,346 709,931 709,931 709,946 15 General Utilities 112,528 104,115 104,116 104,116 103,926 103,926 103,926 - Special Assessment - BIA 170,000 175,000 175,000 175,000 180,000 180,000 180,000 - Frontage and Parcel Taxes 43,380 43,500 43,460 43,540 43,460 43,460 43,500 40

3,868,211 3,946,778 3,939,860 3,947,314 4,043,607 4,043,607 4,043,699 92

GRANTS IN LIEU OF TAXES

Provincial - BC Housing 1,593 0 0 0 0 0 0 - Federal - Post Office Building 10,122 10,500 9,894 9,894 9,380 9,380 10,000 620

11,715 10,500 9,894 9,894 9,380 9,380 10,000 620

SALES OF SERVICE

Garbage Collection Fees 175,293 169,500 173,772 172,907 172,267 172,267 172,700 433 Recycling - Curbside (6) 0 0 (24) 3,757 26,299 28,403 2,104 01) Fire Protection - Cowichan Tribes 96,609 88,000 85,842 97,882 103,264 103,264 95,000 (8,264) Fire Protection Agreement - E.H. 146,028 142,000 156,987 161,436 167,041 167,041 169,000 1,959 Fire Protection Other 5,400 0 0 0 0 0 0 - Administration & Recoveries 15,533 14,000 18,591 5,256 5,298 10,596 14,000 3,404 Sports Field User Fees 13,920 14,000 11,026 6,472 6,318 12,636 12,000 (636) Cowichan Tribes Roads Contrib 564 565 327 655 330 661 565 (96) Public Works Miscellaneous 18,421 10,000 4,999 2,498 2,850 5,700 5,000 (700)

471,762 438,065 451,544 447,082 461,125 498,464 496,668 (1,796)

OTHER REVENUE OWN SOURCES

Licences & Permits

Business Licences 63,756 68,000 67,915 64,016 71,295 71,295 68,000 (3,295) Delivery Vehicle 1,177 1,200 1,349 1,254 1,188 1,200 1,200 - Building Permits 28,435 25,000 24,205 13,862 16,574 28,412 25,000 (3,412) Plumbing Permits 2,914 2,000 4,327 3,161 868 1,489 4,000 2,511 Other Permits/Inspections 3,209 2,000 2,614 1,564 1,301 2,230 2,250 20 Dog Licences 5,861 5,500 5,000 4,864 5,095 5,095 6,000 905

105,352 103,700 105,409 88,720 96,321 109,721 106,450 (3,271)

Fines - Parking & Other 22,923 24,500 35,393 20,583 15,489 26,553 29,500 2,947

Rentals

Buildings 9,533 14,200 15,599 8,225 8,456 14,496 15,918 1,422 Leased Land 61,295 61,500 61,316 45,414 47,958 61,500 61,500 - Margaret Moss Lease 66,667 74,887 74,887 42,923 44,749 76,713 76,713 - Pay Parking 32,170 33,000 33,089 18,641 20,709 35,500 33,000 (2,500) Permit Parking 21,947 24,000 22,444 12,894 11,377 19,504 22,000 2,496 Other Parking 718 550 616 432 455 780 550 (230) Chamber of Commerce Office 22,500 22,500 20,625 13,125 0 0 0 -

214,830 230,637 228,576 141,654 133,705 208,494 209,681 1,187

Page 4 of 18 Page 222 of 247

2012 2013 2013 2013 2014 2014 2014 Budget FINAL BUDGET FINAL YTD YTD Projected BUDGET Variance Return on Investments

Term Deposit & Bank Interest 45,689 45,000 38,484 15,965 5,495 38,000 41,000 3,000

Penalties & Interest on Taxes

Penalties on Taxes 62,089 36,000 30,062 20,079 19,843 30,000 30,000 - Interest on Taxes 11,134 8,500 5,958 2,551 5,419 6,000 6,000 -

73,223 44,500 36,020 22,630 25,262 36,000 36,000 -

Other

Tourism Revenues 0 200 440 0 490 840 430 (410) Miscellaneous Revenue 8,571 8,500 4,964 1,583 4,598 7,882 5,000 (2,882) Land Use Alteration Fees 13,950 15,000 13,400 4,650 9,800 16,800 13,000 (3,800) Subdivision Application Fees 600 1,000 1,500 900 0 0 2,000 2,000 Plan Processing Fees 6,858 5,000 3,056 881 2,970 5,091 5,000 (91) Equipment Charges less operating 138,205 132,054 153,252 0 0 162,452 162,452 - Contributions - City Square 0 0 300 300 0 0 0 - Contributions - Misc 14,115 0 600 500 427 427 0 (427) Contributions - Public Art 00 0 00 0 0- Contributions - Centennial Park 50 0 50 0 0 0 0 -

182,349 161,754 177,562 8,814 18,285 193,493 187,882 (5,611)

UNCONDITIONAL TRANSFERS FROM OTHER GOVERNMENTS

Provincial - Revenue Sharing 739,607 345,675 345,675 345,675 343,523 345,675 345,675 -

CONDITIONAL TRANSFERS FROM OTHER GOVERNMENTS Provincial Grants

- Boundary Restructure 00 0 00 0 0- - Community Tourism 75,000 0 0 0 0 0 0 - - Traffic Fine Revenue Sharing 00 0 00 0 0- - Carbon Grant 5,997 5,000 5,847 1 0 6,000 6,000 - - Other Operating Grants 00 0 00 0 0- - Age Friendly Planning Grant 18,800 5,400 2,200 0 0 0 0 - - BC Solar Community 00 0 00 0 0- - Police Services Transition Funding 1,351,519 0 0 0 0 0 0 - - EV Charging Station 4,000 0 0 0 0 0 0 - - Woodstove Changeout Funding 00 0 00 0 0-

1,455,316 10,400 8,047 1 0 6,000 6,000 -

Federal Grants - Other Federal Grants 18,000 0 0 41,550 0 0 0 - - Gas Tax Funding - ICSP 26,585 5,000 2,388 0 0 0 0 - - Gas Tax Funding - ATP 12,992 5,000 0 0 0 5,000 5,000 -

57,577 10,000 2,388 41,550 0 5,000 5,000 -

Regional CVRD - Transit Cost Recovery 7,000 0 0 0 0 0 0 - Parks Contrib From North Cowichan 13,018 13,300 13,161 13,161 12,855 12,855 13,306 451 Planning Recoveries - Lake Cowichan 00 0 00 0 0-

20,018 13,300 13,161 13,161 12,855 12,855 13,306 451

OTHER TRANSFERS Page 5 of 18 Page 223 of 247

2012 2013 2013 2013 2014 2014 2014 Budget FINAL BUDGET FINAL YTD YTD Projected BUDGET Variance

Prior Years Surplus For Misc Capital 46,630 269,105 131,665 0 0 559,096 559,096 - For Misc Operating 00 0 00 0 0- ‐ 150th Totem Reserve 40,000 0 0 0 0 15,000 15,000 - - Restructure Expenses 2,381 20,000 0 0 0 0 0 - - Additional Totem Refurbishing 00 0 00 0 0- - Planning Student 00 0 00 0 0- - Additional Downtown Maintenance 00 0 00 0 0- - Energy Manager 00 0 00 0 0- - GIS and other Planning Contracting 00 0 00 0 0- ‐ Exhibition Lands/University Village 0 20,000 0 0 0 23,000 23,000 - - TCH Study 0 0 0 0 0 15,000 15,000 - - Info Centre Relocation 0 70,000 50,000 0 0 20,000 20,000 - - Organics/Garbage 0 0 0 0 0 19,384 19,384 - - Extras at McAdam 0 15,000 0 0 0 15,000 15,000 - - Human Resources 6,572 41,784 16,514 0 0 10,000 10,000 - - Moving Expenses - Hiring Overlap 00 0 00 0 0- - City Centennial 00 0 00 0 0- - Transit Pass Rebate Program 438 15,000 3,534 0 0 15,000 15,000 - - DBIA Façade Improvement Program 8,025 0 0 0 0 0 0 - - Council Conference and Training 0 0 0 0 0 3,500 3,500 - - CAC Capital 0 0 0 0 0 13,000 13,000 -

104,046 450,889 201,713 0 0 707,980 707,980 -

Own Funds and reserve accounts Transfer From Water Fund 48,249 57,899 57,889 0 0 0 0 -

From Reserves - Totem Reserve 37,323 0 0 0 0 0 0 - - Snow Reserve 00 0 00 0 0- - Parking Reserve 12,152 0 0 0 0 0 0 - - Environment Reserve 0 33,999 0 0 0 40,999 40,999 - - Election Reserve 0 0 0 0 0 10,220 10,220 - - Schappert Bequest Reserve 14,000 0 0 0 0 0 0 - - Tourism Operating Reserve 10,761 0 0 0 0 16,348 16,348 - - Use of Reserves for Margaret Moss 00 0 00 0 0- - Police Bridging Capital Reserve 0 119,540 119,540 0 0 119,540 119,540 - - Small Communities Grant Reserve 0 205,877 205,877 0 0 200,000 200,000 -

122,485 417,315 383,306 0 0 387,107 387,107 -

COLLECTIONS FOR OTHER GOVERNMENTS

Regional District 1,155,841 1,202,075 1,244,898 1,244,898 1,252,777 1,252,777 1,252,777 - 02) School Taxes 1,990,658 1,990,000 1,964,112 1,964,112 1,934,505 1,934,505 2,029,800 95,295 03) Provincial Policing Levy 247,617 250,000 267,237 267,237 273,652 273,652 255,000 (18,652) C.V. Regional Hospital District 288,399 338,399 361,515 361,515 404,678 404,678 404,678 - Municipal Finance Authority 166 166 163 163 161 161 161 - B.C. Assessment Authority 56,037 56,038 55,399 55,399 54,430 54,430 54,430 -

3,738,718 3,836,678 3,893,325 3,893,325 3,920,203 3,920,203 3,996,846 76,643

Page 6 of 18 Page 224 of 247

2012 2013 2013 2013 2014 2014 2014 Budget FINAL BUDGET FINAL YTD YTD Projected BUDGET Variance GENERAL GOVERNMENT SERVICES Legislative Council Indemnities 92,755 100,004 100,796 59,789 61,368 105,202 106,664 1,462 Legislative Conferences & Travel 14,213 21,751 17,371 4,860 2,916 23,000 23,000 -

106,968 121,755 118,167 64,649 64,284 128,202 129,664 1,462 Administrative City Hall Salaries & Benefits 713,723 764,398 772,574 403,860 435,643 774,722 775,865 1,143 Sick & Severance Accrual Increase 51,575 40,000 68,761 0 0 40,000 40,000 - Conferences and Travel 17,342 14,000 13,178 10,701 9,914 16,996 15,000 (1,996) Meeting Expenses & Annual Functions 12,230 9,500 11,550 3,581 3,605 11,500 11,500 - Memberships 8,346 8,500 9,676 9,764 8,885 8,885 10,000 1,115 Computer Services & Supplies 56,236 66,000 66,898 39,802 44,309 59,825 61,600 1,775 Legal 22,104 20,000 11,905 9,755 17,649 25,000 20,000 (5,000) Training and Recognition 2,864 9,000 4,844 2,607 5,036 8,633 5,500 (3,133) Accounting & Audit 19,919 19,000 19,348 348 (1,675) 19,000 19,000 - Consulting 2,427 3,500 4,600 4,600 5,850 5,850 4,000 (1,850) 04) Human Resources Services 4,470 8,000 42,512 21,132 37,281 42,000 33,000 (9,000) Other General Services 21,654 16,400 12,261 7,404 803 10,000 14,400 4,400 Common Services City Hall Maintenance & Operation 75,399 82,015 68,012 42,163 37,443 74,000 78,160 4,160 Insurance 43,931 67,756 49,171 46,791 51,933 69,933 69,246 (687) Telephone & Postage 25,046 26,000 24,941 18,857 14,938 25,608 29,300 3,692 Advertising 18,120 14,000 11,809 5,990 5,318 9,116 14,000 4,884 Printing & Stationery 10,616 17,200 15,319 12,135 10,948 18,767 16,200 (2,567) Equipment Maintenance & Replacement 86 750 0 0 0 500 500 - Equipment Leases & Service Contracts 8,013 6,300 12,953 7,221 7,736 13,262 11,000 (2,262) Sundry 3,926 6,000 5,642 3,577 3,006 5,153 5,025 (128) Bank Charges 2,000 1,950 2,058 1,214 795 1,362 2,000 638

1,120,027 1,200,269 1,228,012 651,501 699,417 1,240,112 1,235,296 (4,816) Other Election Expenses 0 0 0 0 928 15,575 15,575 - Grants to Organizations 22,025 20,600 28,488 21,886 19,485 21,000 21,250 250 Sr. Citizen Sewer & Water Rebates 597 600 625 625 606 606 700 94 Tourism Grants To Organizations 51,295 54,928 51,522 51,522 44,600 50,000 50,750 750 Tourism Committee 30,790 17,548 5,084 5,084 2,194 15,348 15,348 - Tourism and Public Relations 10,529 11,500 12,952 12,410 18,816 18,816 16,000 (2,816) Totem Tours Contribution 9,000 9,000 9,000 9,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 - Totem Installations 3,690 0 0 27,000 0 0 0 - Event Promotion 0 500 1,675 75 0 0 1,700 1,700 City Centennial 67,157 0 1,643 1,643 120 120 0 (120) Grant to Info Centre 0 70,000 50,000 0 0 20,000 20,000 - Communications (training and consulting) 1,800 6,000 2,256 493 11,680 11,680 10,800 (880) Remembrance Day Expenses 4,630 4,784 3,814 250 252 4,700 4,700 - Operations & Maint. (Leased Bldgs.) 3,790 4,500 3,640 3,640 3,789 4,069 4,069 - Margaret Moss 51,848 74,887 0 0 1,405 76,713 76,713 - Junior Council 0 0 0 0 0 3,000 3,000 - 257,151 274,847 170,698 133,627 113,876 251,627 250,605 (1,022)

Page 7 of 18 Page 225 of 247

2012 2013 2013 2013 2014 2014 2014 Budget FINAL BUDGET FINAL YTD YTD Projected BUDGET Variance Administration Distributions - Fire (16,212) (16,212) (16,212) (9,457) (12,003) (20,576) (20,576) - Administration Distributions - Garbage 0 0 0 0 (7,280) (12,480) (12,480) - Administration Distributions - Water (247,579) (250,000) (250,000) (145,833) (149,000) (255,428) (255,428) - Administration Distributions - Sewer (130,305) (131,000) (131,000) (76,417) (78,047) (133,795) (133,795) - (394,096) (397,212) (397,212) (231,707) (246,329) (422,279) (422,279) -

1,090,050 1,199,659 1,119,666 618,071 631,247 1,197,662 1,193,286 (4,376)

PROTECTIVE SERVICES

Police Costs 193,350 0 0 0 0 0 0 -

Fire Department

Salaries - Chief & Officers 18,964 23,000 19,307 11,156 11,125 19,071 23,000 3,929 05) Call Pay - Volunteers 106,272 119,000 101,432 43,094 36,576 110,824 119,000 8,176 Fire Hall Operation & Maintenance 29,268 31,900 31,495 19,689 22,683 31,000 30,497 (503) Fire Alarm System 7,316 8,900 9,463 4,282 6,484 11,116 10,715 (401) Training & Conferences 37,518 42,500 43,915 16,915 8,190 43,000 45,400 2,400 Firefighter's Insurance 7,089 7,000 7,438 5,911 7,092 7,100 7,100 - 06) Fire Investigation & Prevention 11,876 14,500 10,760 5,777 17,307 21,000 13,100 (7,900) Hydrant Rental 11,869 12,000 12,404 6,202 10,217 10,217 13,000 2,783 Clothing 5,475 5,000 4,261 3,374 4,325 6,000 9,000 3,000 Firefighting Equipment & Maintenance 7,193 10,000 10,596 5,776 5,156 8,840 11,000 2,160 Fire Dept Other 16,611 20,200 19,414 16,500 14,365 24,625 24,000 (625) Administration Charge - Fire 16,212 16,212 16,212 9,457 12,003 20,576 20,576 (0) PW Storage Shed Hydro 0 500 0 0 496 851 0 (851)

275,663 310,712 286,696 148,132 156,018 314,219 326,388 12,169

Fire Vehicle Operation & Maintenance

1-2000 Ladder Truck 18,610 18,500 14,340 9,270 10,692 18,329 15,124 (3,205) 3-2000 Chev Crew Cab 3,465 2,500 1,834 989 884 1,516 2,299 783 4-2002 Lafrance Pumper 5,480 4,400 4,085 1,944 1,950 3,342 4,374 1,032 5-2005 Lafrance Pumper 5,795 4,800 4,019 2,684 3,091 5,298 4,524 (774) 6-2005 Tank Truck 4,522 3,460 2,763 2,573 2,099 3,598 3,424 (174) 7-1990 Ford Command Unit 2,867 3,500 2,571 1,765 1,707 2,926 3,849 923 8-1982 Pumper 847 0 545 577 0 0 0 - 9-1987 Rescue Truck 2,012 975 1,065 1,168 0 0 0 - 10-2013 Rescue Truck 0 2,925 1,576 860 1,835 3,146 3,524 378

43,598 41,060 32,799 21,832 22,258 38,156 37,118 (1,038)

Total Fire Department 319,261 351,772 319,496 169,964 178,275 352,375 363,506 11,131

Building Inspection Building Inspection - Salaries & Benefits 87,152 103,139 86,055 43,920 44,729 95,938 100,000 4,062 Building Inspection - Transportation 4,260 4,260 3,900 2,275 2,275 3,900 4,000 100 Building Inspection - Other 3,414 6,200 4,402 1,637 3,682 6,311 5,300 (1,011)

94,826 113,599 94,357 47,832 50,686 106,149 109,300 3,151

Animal Control

Animal Control Contract & Supplies 18,478 18,500 18,344 10,804 10,540 18,069 18,500 431

Page 8 of 18 Page 226 of 247

2012 2013 2013 2013 2014 2014 2014 Budget FINAL BUDGET FINAL YTD YTD Projected BUDGET Variance Other Protection

Security Camera Operating 915 750 605 605 0 700 700 - Commissionaires - Day Patrols 33,801 33,000 34,864 20,149 19,841 34,013 34,000 (13) Commissionaires - Evening Patrols 11,899 12,000 11,554 6,586 7,280 12,480 12,000 (480)

46,615 45,750 47,023 27,340 27,121 47,193 46,700 (493)

TRANSPORTATION SERVICES Common Services PW Administration Salaries & Benefits 285,932 302,200 310,865 167,531 166,052 298,913 303,988 5,075 Wages - Engineering 82,537 87,375 78,803 42,777 57,794 129,700 125,000 (4,700) Engineering Services 6,159 8,000 27,615 19,289 7,967 10,000 10,500 500 Other - Common Services 61,182 58,600 50,675 28,426 43,484 55,000 58,900 3,900 Safety Committee and Officer 21,441 20,000 15,585 11,284 9,645 20,000 20,500 500 Other Safety Supplies 2,430 3,000 2,829 1,605 1,216 2,084 3,000 916 Workshop & Yards 44,866 55,000 55,173 39,158 19,715 47,000 52,700 5,700 Small Tools & Equipment 5,978 6,000 8,315 6,323 4,602 7,889 7,000 (889)

510,525 540,175 549,861 316,393 310,475 570,587 581,588 11,001

PW Admin Distributions - Water (152,495) (153,000) (153,000) (89,250) (121,447) (208,195) (208,195) - PW Admin Distributions - Sewer (58,230) (60,000) (60,000) (35,000) (47,230) (80,965) (80,965) -

(210,725) (213,000) (213,000) (124,250) (168,677) (289,160) (289,160) -

299,800 327,175 336,861 192,143 141,799 281,427 292,428 11,001

General Maintenance Street Maintenance 31,199 45,000 45,588 31,557 29,312 50,250 46,500 (3,750) Crack Sealing 29,999 30,000 28,573 0 30,000 30,000 30,000 - Sidewalk Maintenance 83,326 72,000 39,194 6,795 47,586 72,000 72,000 - Storm Sewers 72,662 50,000 59,591 18,376 33,261 50,000 52,800 2,800 Storm Water Quality Testing 6,229 15,000 3,605 0 0 8,000 8,000 - Marchmont Storm Pumps 4,364 10,000 810 0 3,343 5,731 5,450 (281) Dike Maintenance 1,731 6,000 1,783 0 0 3,000 3,000 - Street Sweeping 56,544 60,000 44,096 28,855 24,770 50,000 50,000 - Boulevards 65,776 50,000 57,719 38,275 31,872 50,000 50,000 - Tree Maintenance 1,590 25,000 8,873 795 9,239 15,838 20,000 4,162 07) Totem Maintenance 3,584 29,196 7,343 843 4,118 7,059 15,000 7,941 Snow Removal 51,279 65,000 38,959 7,980 41,864 50,000 50,000 - Weed Control 5,465 7,000 15,196 14,678 1,344 9,000 9,000 - Highway Medians 0 1,000 0 0 0 0 0 -

413,748 465,196 351,330 148,154 256,708 400,878 411,750 10,872

Cost Recovery Projects Other Jobs Charged out 42 0 107 2,394 680 680 (900) (1,580) Cowichan River Flooding 00 0 00 0 0-

42 0 107 2,394 680 680 (900) (1,580)

Street Lighting Street Lights 80,343 75,000 84,047 41,178 43,005 79,000 80,775 1,775 Decorative Lights 7,100 6,500 7,156 3,451 3,719 6,375 6,322 (53)

87,443 81,500 91,202 44,629 46,724 85,375 87,097 1,722

Page 9 of 18 Page 227 of 247

2012 2013 2013 2013 2014 2014 2014 Budget FINAL BUDGET FINAL YTD YTD Projected BUDGET Variance Traffic Services Road Marking 54,767 51,000 42,135 5,328 29,111 49,904 51,000 1,096 Street Signs 17,383 25,500 28,332 12,888 18,984 26,000 25,500 (500) Traffic Signals 27,379 32,000 28,798 11,813 12,301 30,000 30,439 439

99,529 108,500 99,266 30,029 60,396 105,904 106,939 1,035

Parking and Bylaw Enforcement 08) Commissionaires 68,989 80,500 80,334 45,147 29,544 50,646 79,500 28,854 Vehicle Charges - Commissionaires 4,260 4,440 3,900 2,275 650 1,114 4,440 3,326 Other - Parking Expenses 3,315 2,250 3,241 682 1,795 3,077 1,450 (1,627) Parking Lot Lease 8,461 8,600 8,477 5,727 5,758 9,870 8,600 (1,270)

85,025 95,790 95,951 53,831 37,746 64,708 93,990 29,282

09) Other Bylaw Enforcement 0 1,500 61 61 14,726 25,244 100 (25,144) Parking Lot Maintenance 11,181 12,275 14,913 10,409 8,157 13,984 12,935 (1,049)

96,206 109,565 110,925 64,301 60,630 103,937 107,025 3,088

Transit 10) Transit Pass Rebate Program 438 15,000 3,534 1,602 2,184 3,744 15,000 11,256

438 15,000 3,534 1,602 2,184 3,744 15,000 11,256

Municipal Equipment Charges 01 '90/05 Dump Truck 13,906 8,653 15,041 2,953 7,767 13,315 10,437 (2,878) 02 98 Ingersoll Compressor 267 1,611 1,280 535 714 1,224 887 (337) 03 2004 GMC Service Body 7,871 9,083 5,509 4,222 2,965 5,082 7,357 2,275 05 2000 GMC Dump 8,396 11,336 9,360 7,434 2,852 4,890 8,840 3,950 06 2000 Altec Lift Truck 4,908 3,776 3,629 2,767 2,692 4,615 4,757 142 07 98 case 580L Backhoe 4,735 8,951 0 0 0 0 0 - 09 06 John Deere X724A 4,252 3,126 4,422 2,906 1,948 3,339 4,393 1,054 10 92 GMC Tank Truck 1,556 5,141 0 130 0 0 0 - 11 97 Int 1 Man Garbage Truck 00 0 00 0 0- 12 05 Paint Sprayer 344 415 136 136 24 42 345 303 15 76 Turf Cutter 1 500 13 13 0 0 25 25 16 00 VA-25S Sidewalk Grinder 126 530 156 33 0 0 115 115 17 04 Sand Spreader 3,130 4,000 2,120 1,016 462 792 2,280 1,488 18 Chain Saws/ Trimmers 92 565 141 104 38 66 133 67 20 99 Ford F250 6,039 5,520 1,294 1,482 0 0 0 - 21 Mowers/Leaf Blowers 2,611 2,470 1,753 621 901 1,544 1,765 221 22 2004 F350 Dump 7,645 7,049 9,141 3,714 2,955 5,065 6,484 1,419 24 Weedeater/Hedge Trimmers 1,608 1,230 1,858 1,378 1,037 1,777 1,900 123 25 Compactors 1,889 1,250 945 771 192 328 1,050 722 26 2002 Sewer Rodder 517 3,475 0 80 0 0 0 - 28 Trash Pumps 349 0 148 0 171 293 0 (293) 29 06 John Deere Mower 3,621 2,961 5,537 3,537 2,196 3,765 4,143 378 30 Edger 110 0 91 91 291 498 100 (398) 31 2000 Ford Van 7,106 5,460 8,973 5,178 3,554 6,093 6,707 614 32 2000 14' Sander 563 3,000 74 0 243 417 400 (17) 33 2002 Dodge Dakota 5,920 7,204 7,839 5,676 2,897 4,966 7,157 2,191 34 1999 Ranger X-cab 4,360 3,114 792 979 0 0 0 - 35 2000 Parks Trailer 758 210 96 96 52 89 742 653 11) 36 91 Case Loader 6,037 11,125 3,442 947 11,159 19,130 3,650 (15,480) 38 00 Honda Generator 207 0 354 278 300 515 300 (215) 40 Stihl Cutoff Saw 1,320 1,750 992 262 738 1,266 1,125 (141) 42 2004 Husqvarna Mower 3,607 1,891 0 458 0 0 0 - Page 10 of 18 Page 228 of 247

2012 2013 2013 2013 2014 2014 2014 Budget FINAL BUDGET FINAL YTD YTD Projected BUDGET Variance 12) 44 1994 Elgin Sweeper 50,739 44,156 54,357 17,959 10,119 17,346 50,637 33,291 45 88 Pressure washer 48 730 13 0 12 20 50 30 46 04 Grumman Van 7,613 10,803 13,329 10,963 2,816 4,827 9,923 5,096 47 2001 Parks Trailer 136 136 647 144 169 290 169 (121) 48 89 Cement Mixer 47 772 66 49 52 89 52 (37) 49 1994 Parks Trailer 134 436 464 142 294 503 389 (114) 51 2004 Parks Trailer 759 456 194 194 2,673 4,582 519 (4,063) 52 05 Dakota 9,140 2,636 11,204 8,593 1,929 3,306 5,907 2,601 54 99 Ford F250 29 7,555 0 0 0 0 0 - 55 2005 GMC P/U 5,493 5,840 6,192 3,065 2,237 3,835 5,407 1,572 13) 56 2006 New Holland Backhoe 16,658 16,454 8,552 6,391 3,127 5,360 14,977 9,617 57 2007 Steam cleaner 212 370 25 23 0 0 190 190 58 2007 Civic Hybrid 2,042 5,834 2,835 1,872 1,675 2,871 2,142 (729) 59 2008 Chevy Silverado PU 6,384 8,663 6,185 4,545 2,879 4,935 6,692 1,757 60 2008 GMC Dump Box 11,642 7,443 8,164 3,877 2,516 4,313 7,423 3,110 61 2008 Utility Trailer 311 700 179 154 453 777 450 (327) 62 2008 Honda Road Saw 1,437 750 958 434 936 1,605 1,290 (315) 63 2009 Snowblower 249 550 74 0 202 346 220 (126) 64 Herring Pump 2 0 25 0 0 0 0 - 65 2011 International Garbage Truck 27,166 18,350 23,257 12,695 12,056 20,667 21,479 812 66 2011 Ford Fiesta 1,924 2,750 1,639 1,402 1,199 2,055 1,831 (224) 67 2012 Mower - Kohler 52" 763 0 2,099 773 1,780 3,051 1,643 (1,408) 68 2012 Vactor Truck 14,444 0 33,226 19,484 14,604 25,036 28,599 3,563 69 2012 Backhoe CAT 420 2,115 0 11,168 6,176 4,308 7,384 9,285 1,901 70 2013 MightE Truck - Electric 0 0 4,629 3,987 1,963 3,365 4,756 1,391 71 2013 Toyota Prius - Hybrid 0 0 4,104 2,909 1,919 3,289 3,692 403 72 2013 Brine Trailer 0 0 2,211 0 1,496 2,565 939 (1,626) 73 2014 Portable Generator 0 0 0 0 874 1,498 0 (1,498) 74 2014 Honda Fit 0 0 0 0 2,723 4,667 0 (4,667) E3 Fleet Costs 560 10,000 254 254 0 0 500 500 Undistributed Charges 4,520 5,000 4,495 2,414 3,093 5,302 5,003 (299) Transfer Equipment Surplus 138,205 132,054 153,252 0 0 162,452 162,452 -

406,623 397,834 438,933 156,299 124,247 375,447 421,708 46,261

Equipment Charges (406,623) (397,834) (438,933) (156,299) (124,247) (375,447) (421,708) (46,261)

Net Cost of equipment ------

ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH SERVICES

Public Washrooms Canada Ave Washrooms 14,013 16,135 13,540 8,530 8,199 14,055 15,061 1,006 Centennial Park Washrooms 9,381 10,200 10,201 5,631 4,789 8,209 10,808 2,599

23,394 26,335 23,741 14,160 12,987 22,264 25,869 3,605

Environmental Programs BC Solar Community 00 0 00 0 0- Environmental Programs 1,819 40,999 555 0 15,657 40,999 40,999 - Cowichan Green Community 3,500 4,000 4,000 4,000 4,500 4,500 4,000 (500)

5,319 44,999 4,555 4,000 20,157 45,499 44,999 (500)

Page 11 of 18 Page 229 of 247

2012 2013 2013 2013 2014 2014 2014 Budget FINAL BUDGET FINAL YTD YTD Projected BUDGET Variance Other Programs Committee on Disability Issues 67 800 596 96 0 0 800 800 Cowichan Family Life Bus 0 200 0 0 0 0 0 - Total other programs 67 1,000 596 96 0 0 800 800

Residential Garbage Collection Wages & Benefits - Collection 53,912 59,045 54,474 25,440 30,406 57,000 59,045 2,045 Municipal Equipment - Collection 38,677 40,000 38,504 19,979 20,961 35,933 40,000 4,067 Administration Charge - Garbage 0 0 0 0 7,280 12,480 12,480 - Cardboard Bins 1,258 1,200 400 216 114 195 1,200 1,005 Garbage Tipping Fees 28,954 29,428 27,545 16,153 13,098 28,800 29,428 628 Recycling 730 0 0 0 1,943 3,330 0 (3,330) Recycling Tipping Fees 3,907 3,650 5,480 2,138 5,941 10,184 6,084 (4,100) 14) Other Programs - e.g. Yard waste 0 13,795 3,559 1,701 1,535 30,000 48,000 18,000 Organics Startup 00 0 00 0 0- Organics Materials 00 0 00 0 0- 15) Organics Disposal 15,989 15,382 15,482 9,577 6,367 10,915 17,000 6,085 Other Collection - Litter 4,847 6,000 5,331 3,110 3,110 5,331 6,000 669 Miscellaneous Garbage Costs 1,272 1,000 471 233 830 1,423 1,250 (173)

149,546 169,500 151,247 78,547 91,585 195,592 220,487 24,895

PLANNING AND STUDY PROJECTS Planning Salaries and Benefits 95,260 109,000 111,775 53,388 68,994 124,163 126,190 2,027 Planning & Zoning Expenses 14,503 14,075 10,393 4,092 7,690 13,183 13,100 (83) Restructure 2,381 20,000 0 0 0 0 0 - Exhibition Lands/University Village 0 20,000 0 0 23,367 23,367 23,000 (367) Heritage 0 5,000 4,533 0 0 5,000 5,000 - Age Friendly Project 17,800 5,400 2,000 2,000 0 1,000 1,000 - Active Transportation Plan 22,992 5,000 0 0 289 5,000 5,000 - Quickstart - ICSP 26,585 5,000 2,388 51 0 0 0 - DBIA Façade Improvement Program 8,025 10,000 2,500 0 0 10,000 10,000 - Carbon Offsets/Projects 7,000 7,000 4,951 0 (1) 3,500 3,500 - EV Charging Stations 6,888 0 0 0 0 0 0 - TCH Study 0 0 0 0 15,000 15,000 15,000 -

201,434 200,475 138,540 59,531 115,340 200,213 201,790 1,577

RECREATION & CULTURAL SERVICES

Joint Recreation Facilities Joint Aquannis 00 0 00 0- Joint Cowichan Aquatic Centre 211,415 195,000 214,313 193,639 213,950 219,500 219,500 - Joint Parks 5,200 5,638 5,257 0 0 5,638 5,638 - Sportsplex Public Use 3,053 7,500 7,500 7,500 10,536 10,536 7,500 (3,036)

219,668 208,138 227,070 201,139 224,486 235,674 232,638 (3,036)

Page 12 of 18 Page 230 of 247

2012 2013 2013 2013 2014 2014 2014 Budget FINAL BUDGET FINAL YTD YTD Projected BUDGET Variance City Parks & Facilities Centennial Heights Parks 12,840 9,000 10,360 3,919 4,222 7,238 10,700 3,462 Station St Park 228 4,500 116 114 1,075 1,843 4,500 2,657 Charles Hoey Park 33,866 35,800 35,491 21,252 22,812 36,000 35,927 (73) Rotary Park 60,382 52,000 50,662 21,976 38,766 52,000 52,116 116 16) McAdam Park 58,516 77,000 56,876 32,849 36,932 63,312 77,000 13,688 Centennial Park 54,863 51,000 51,778 26,404 27,836 47,720 53,080 5,360 City Square 21,690 23,000 25,970 19,491 19,785 22,000 22,800 800 Farmers' Market 57 500 395 202 0 0 500 500 17) Downtown Area 108,716 107,200 141,978 75,486 58,809 100,816 113,112 12,296 Cliffs Road Pit 1,086 2,000 1,184 1,184 1,247 1,500 1,500 - China Gardens 2,082 2,000 4,208 1,455 1,925 3,299 3,850 551 Friendship (Sii ye' yu) Trail 2,718 1,500 317 304 478 820 1,000 180 Canada Avenue Park 0 0 498 0 2,412 4,136 5,950 1,814 Parks Other 5,565 4,000 8,942 7,348 4,723 8,097 5,593 (2,504) Parks Training 6,566 6,000 2,469 1,596 2,171 3,721 5,500 1,779 Benches & Plaques 8,167 800 7 7 0 0 800 800 Graffiti Removal 3,117 5,000 2,840 2,109 3,917 5,000 5,000 - Pole Banners 6,659 4,000 3,433 2,251 1,012 1,734 4,000 2,266 Highway Banners 1,665 2,500 3,415 2,515 1,046 1,794 3,200 1,406

388,783 387,800 400,939 220,461 229,169 361,029 406,128 45,099

Cultural Buildings & Facilities Library 177,992 185,709 185,708 139,281 149,226 198,968 198,968 - VSO Centre 6,104 13,201 5,366 4,233 5,142 6,000 5,253 (747) Public Art Maintenance 0 0 1,670 0 0 750 750 - Museum Grant & Operating Expenses 8,916 8,700 9,125 8,700 9,003 9,003 8,700 (303)

193,012 207,610 201,869 152,214 163,371 214,721 213,671 (1,050)

FISCAL SERVICES Interest Interest on Prepaid Taxes 955 1,750 1,130 855 806 1,382 1,000 (382) Debt Interest 2002 Fire Truck Interest 4,346 0 0 0 0 0 0 - 2005 Fire Truck Interest 3,736 1,210 2,995 0 0 600 600 - Pool Debt 46,439 47,125 47,125 23,563 23,563 47,125 47,125 -

55,476 50,085 51,251 24,418 24,369 49,107 48,725 (382)

Principal 2005 Fire Truck Principal 28,221 30,200 30,199 19,191 19,604 30,808 30,808 - 2002 Fire Truck Principal 22,659 0 0 0 0 0 0 - Pool Debt Principal 72,415 72,415 72,415 0 0 72,415 72,415 - 123,295 102,615 102,613 19,191 19,604 103,223 103,223 -

Page 13 of 18 Page 231 of 247

2012 2013 2013 2013 2014 2014 2014 Budget FINAL BUDGET FINAL YTD YTD Projected BUDGET Variance Transfer to Own Reserves & Allowances Machinery & Equip Repl Res Fund 146,120 151,965 151,965 0 0 161,385 161,385 - Fire Dept Equip Reserve Fund 96,864 136,208 136,208 0 0 130,202 130,202 - Totem Reserve Fund 0 0 1,331 0 0 15,000 15,000 - Snow Removal Reserve 12,920 0 26,041 0 0 0 0 - Environment Reserve 5,181 0 6,446 0 0 0 0 - Elections Reserve 5,000 5,000 5,000 0 0 0 0 - Tourism Reserve 0 0 11,554 0 0 0 0 - New Works Reserve Fun - Margaret Moss 14,820 0 84,535 0 0 8,445 8,445 - VSO Reserve 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 - Insurance Reserve 22,582 0 21,409 0 0 0 0 - Human Resources Reserve 3,530 0 0 0 0 0 0 - MACDI Reserve 0 0 937 733 0 0 0 - Public Art Reserve 25,728 0 1,400 0 0 0 0 - Small Communities Grant Reserve 205,877 0 0 0 0 0 0 - Policing Reserve 56,633 0 0 0 0 0 0 - Police Bridging Capital Fund (PBC) Reserv 1,770,684 689,268 687,943 0 0 709,946 709,946 -

2,365,939 982,441 1,134,769 733 0 1,024,978 1,024,978 -

CONTRIBUTION TO GENERAL CAPITAL FUND Paid by Prior Years' Surpluses & Reserves 46,630 269,105 131,665 0 0 559,096 559,096 - Paid by General Taxation 599,893 548,195 460,071 0 0 569,413 569,413 -

Total CONTRIB. to CAPITAL FUND 646,523 817,300 591,736 0 0 1,128,509 1,128,509 -

TRANSFER TO UTILITY OPERATING FUNDS Sewer Parcel Tax 43,380 43,500 43,460 20 43,460 43,460 43,500 40

TRANSFER TO OTHER GOVERNMENTS

Business Improvement Areas 170,000 175,000 175,000 175,000 180,000 180,000 180,000 - Total Transfers to Other Government 170,000 175,000 175,000 175,000 180,000 180,000 180,000 -

Page 14 of 18 Page 232 of 247

2012 2013 2013 2013 2014 2014 2014 Budget FINAL BUDGET FINAL YTD YTD Projected BUDGET Variance COLLECTIONS FOR OTHER GOVERNMENTS Cowichan Valley Regional District General Government 79,023 82,184 101,622 101,622 95,767 95,767 95,767 - Malahat Transit 00 0 00 0 0- Transit 129,135 134,300 136,679 136,679 140,260 140,260 140,260 - Emergency 911 32,204 33,492 33,228 33,228 38,683 38,683 38,683 - Economic Development 22,920 23,837 28,139 28,139 30,055 30,055 30,055 - Regional Tourism 6,166 6,413 6,279 6,279 6,315 6,315 6,315 - Environmental Initiatives 25,312 26,324 25,982 25,982 26,128 26,128 26,128 - Emergency Planning 26,461 27,519 28,470 28,470 28,631 28,631 28,631 - Regional Parks 48,489 50,429 49,774 49,774 50,054 50,054 50,054 - Kinsol Trestle 569 592 584 584 587 587 587 - Liquid Waste Management Plan 0 0 13,561 13,561 12,302 12,302 12,302 - Regional Parkland Acquisition 40,471 42,090 40,269 40,269 44,896 44,896 44,896 - Community Centre 530,727 551,956 561,238 561,238 549,840 549,840 549,840 - Community Centre Theatre Loan 5,736 5,965 5,729 5,729 5,748 5,748 5,748 - Victim Services 5,758 5,988 5,821 5,821 5,849 5,849 5,849 - Safer Futures 1,689 1,757 1,704 1,704 1,713 1,713 1,713 - Social Planning 3,072 3,195 3,099 3,099 3,114 3,114 3,114 - Cowichan Community Policing 31,000 32,240 31,000 31,000 31,000 31,000 31,000 - Solid Waste Management 154,233 160,402 158,844 158,844 168,959 168,959 168,959 -

1,142,965 1,188,683 1,232,022 1,232,022 1,239,901 1,239,901 1,239,901 -

18) School Taxes 1,990,658 1,990,000 1,964,112 1,964,112 1,934,505 1,934,505 2,029,800 95,295 19) Provincial Policing Levy 247,617 250,000 267,237 267,237 273,652 273,652 255,000 (18,652) C.V. Regional Hospital District 288,399 338,399 361,515 361,515 404,678 404,678 404,678 - Municipal Finance Authority 166 166 163 163 161 161 161 - B.C. Assessment Authority 56,037 56,038 55,399 55,399 54,430 54,430 54,430 -

3,725,842 3,823,286 3,880,449 3,880,449 3,907,327 3,907,327 3,983,970 76,643

Page 15 of 18 Page 233 of 247

2012 2013 2013 2013 2014 2014 2014 Budget FINAL BUDGET FINAL YTD YTD Projected BUDGET Variance

SEWER ENTERPRISE - REVENUES Sales of Service 20) Sewer User Fees 568,096 597,369 607,355 606,990 628,336 628,336 637,613 9,277 User Fees - Reserve 9,455 15,399 9,929 9,929 10,424 10,424 10,425 1 User Fees - N. Cowichan 55,560 55,477 57,606 58,114 60,304 60,304 60,486 182 Metered Sewer Fees 186,139 169,279 200,302 (761) 115,055 191,759 186,139 (5,620) Transmission Fees - Tribes 0 0 190 0 201 201 200 (1) Cost sharing N. Cowichan 20,331 18,503 17,059 3,836 6,042 19,800 19,800 -

839,581 856,027 892,441 678,107 820,362 910,824 914,663 3,839 Other Revenue From Own Sources 21) Return on Investments 15,360 14,900 13,535 6,546 13,064 22,395 12,000 (10,395) Transfer from General - Parcel Tax 43,380 43,500 43,460 20 43,460 43,460 43,500 40

898,321 914,427 949,436 684,673 876,886 976,679 970,163 (6,516)

SEWER ENTERPRISE - EXPENDITURES Administration Toilet Rebate - Sewer 2,610 5,000 1,630 1,100 1,000 1,714 2,000 286 Sewer Grants 0 1,000 0 0 0 0 0 - Sewer Engineering & Planning 0 14,000 0 0 0 14,000 14,000 - Insurance Allocation - Sewer 857 1,000 920 920 951 951 951 - Sewer Training 0 3,000 0 0 0 3,000 3,000 - Other Sewer Admin 1,456 5,000 50 0 0 5,000 5,000 - Administration Charges - Sewer 130,305 131,000 131,000 76,417 78,047 133,795 133,795 0 PW Administration Charge - Sewer 58,230 60,000 60,000 35,000 47,230 80,965 80,965 0

193,458 220,000 193,600 113,437 127,228 239,425 239,711 286 Transmission & Distribution 22) System Maintenance 70,723 75,000 63,241 25,462 33,642 57,673 75,000 17,327 Infiltration Investigation 10,954 15,000 0 0 0 7,500 7,500 - 23) Marchmont Street Station 37,460 40,000 44,719 27,378 18,531 31,767 45,798 14,031 24) Pumping - Lift Stations 28,302 27,000 44,847 23,330 13,011 22,305 34,773 12,468

147,439 157,000 152,807 76,170 65,185 119,245 163,071 43,826

Contribution to Joint Utilities Board 269,673 366,887 268,331 100,517 129,098 385,197 385,197 -

Sewer Debt Interest 13,230 13,230 13,230 6,615 6,615 13,230 13,230 -

AMORTIZATION OF CAPITAL ASSETS 0 0 0 0 0 40,000 40,000 -

Total Expenditures 623,800 757,117 627,967 296,739 328,126 797,098 841,209 44,111

EXCESS REVENUES OVER EXPENDITUR 274,521 157,310 321,469 387,934 548,760 179,581 128,954 (50,627)

ADJUST FOR NON-CASH - AMORTIZATIO 0 0 0 0 0 40,000 40,000 - ADJUST FOR CASH ITEMS - NON PSAB TSF from Prior Years Surplus 0 393,613 0 0 0 0 0 - Prior Years' Surplus For Capital Fund 0 (393,613) (153,146) 0 0 0 0 - Cont. to Sewer Capital Fund (141,800) (143,387) (26,743) 0 0 (155,031) (155,031) - Debt Repayment Debentures (13,923) (13,923) (13,923) (13,923) (13,923) (13,923) (13,923) -

(155,723) (157,310) (193,811) (13,923) (13,923) (168,954) (168,954) - 118,798 0 127,658 374,011 534,837 10,627 (40,000) (50,627)

Page 16 of 18 Page 234 of 247

2012 2013 2013 2013 2014 2014 2014 Budget FINAL BUDGET FINAL YTD YTD Projected BUDGET Variance WATER UTILITY - REVENUES

Sale of Water City Flat Rate 463,345 487,333 477,960 478,418 495,378 495,378 496,939 1,561 City Metered 110,616 112,941 112,569 (442) 59,830 119,642 119,642 - Cowichan Tribes Flat Rate 17,998 21,385 18,920 18,920 20,148 20,148 19,677 (471) Cowichan Tribes Metered 141,020 131,103 152,503 0 105,289 152,527 152,527 - 25) North Cowichan I Flat Rate 313,378 325,072 333,614 166,425 178,260 356,520 346,959 (9,561) North Cowichan I Metered 43,173 45,274 47,550 672 27,733 46,696 46,696 - North Cowichan II Flat Rate 270,016 290,737 283,697 141,657 149,083 298,166 295,045 (3,121) North Cowichan II Metered 50,914 58,668 43,744 0 39,657 55,069 55,069 - Eagle Heights Flat Rate 137,536 144,481 144,568 72,241 76,794 153,588 150,351 (3,237) Eagle Heights Metered 80,251 96,830 99,173 0 68,649 86,799 86,799 -

1,628,247 1,713,824 1,714,298 877,891 1,220,821 1,784,533 1,769,704 (14,829) Other Services Water Custom 0 500 0 0 0 0 - Water On/Off 360 500 515 515 46 500 500 -

360 1,000 515 515 46 500 500 - Other Revenue from Own Sources Penalties 28,097 22,660 22,699 11,483 14,135 24,231 22,700 (1,531) Water Studies 4,124 500 1,039 1,572 600 1,029 1,000 (29) 26) Interest on Investment 61,276 40,000 50,135 24,921 46,553 79,806 50,000 (29,806)

93,497 63,160 73,873 37,976 61,288 105,066 73,700 (31,366) 1,722,104 1,777,984 1,788,686 916,382 1,282,155 1,890,099 1,843,904 (46,195)

WATER UTILITY - EXPENDITURES

Administration Salaries & Benefits -Water 4,737 6,000 5,205 2,872 4,487 7,692 6,000 (1,692) Toilet Rebate - Water 2,610 5,000 1,680 1,100 1,000 1,714 2,000 286 Water Grants 3,102 7,000 3,374 1,682 1,052 1,804 4,000 2,196 Water Engineering & Planning 7,470 21,000 8,402 1,258 4,299 21,000 21,000 - Insurance Allocation 5,232 6,000 5,489 5,489 5,703 5,703 5,703 - Training and Courses 2,010 6,000 3,924 2,183 1,868 3,202 6,000 2,798 Other Water Admin 515 6,000 276 241 494 846 6,000 5,154 Legal - Water 0 3,500 973 104 0 3,500 3,500 - Administration Charges - Water 247,579 250,000 250,000 145,833 149,000 255,428 255,428 (0) PW Administration Charge - Water 152,495 153,000 153,000 89,250 121,447 208,195 208,195 0

425,750 463,500 432,323 250,013 289,349 509,084 517,826 8,742

Page 17 of 18 Page 235 of 247

2012 2013 2013 2013 2014 2014 2014 Budget FINAL BUDGET FINAL YTD YTD Projected BUDGET Variance Transmission & Distribution 27) General System Maintenance 35,204 42,019 35,268 11,149 17,144 29,390 42,834 13,444 28) City System Maintenance 86,029 98,700 101,190 33,961 61,532 105,484 98,700 (6,784) 29) North Cowichan System Maintenance 85,694 101,501 124,393 54,426 43,385 74,375 100,000 25,625 30) Eagle Heights Maintenance 35,983 49,000 45,533 23,492 24,241 41,555 49,000 7,445 31) Cowichan Tribes Maintenance 2,641 21,000 6,944 1,795 7,981 13,681 21,000 7,319 Metering - High Use Services 3 2,600 0 0 0 0 2,600 2,600 Meter Reading 9,108 15,000 13,098 3,345 2,244 15,000 20,000 5,000

254,662 329,820 326,426 128,167 156,527 279,485 334,134 54,649

Pumping General Pumphouse Maintenance 30,548 34,192 29,608 18,394 22,263 38,165 34,192 (3,973) 32) Pumphouse No. 2 92,844 93,164 74,097 38,270 32,858 56,327 91,164 34,837 33) Pumphouse No. 3 7,014 15,325 4,734 3,328 2,115 3,626 15,325 11,699 34) Pumphouse No. 4 38,868 60,000 45,614 17,195 25,447 43,623 60,000 16,377 Pumphouse No. 5 3,365 11,025 13,360 4,115 4,235 7,261 11,025 3,764 35) Eagle Heights Pumphouse 17,933 19,025 12,971 9,456 7,110 12,188 19,304 7,116 36) Gibbins Road Pump & Reservoir 25,385 30,250 15,268 8,400 10,232 17,540 32,750 15,210 Graffiti Removal Water Buildings 1 1,000 219 216 0 0 1,000 1,000

215,958 263,981 195,871 99,374 104,260 178,731 264,760 86,029

AMORTIZATION OF CAPITAL ASSETS 0 0 0 0 0 147,493 147,000 (493) Total Expenditures 896,370 1,057,301 954,620 477,554 550,136 1,114,794 1,263,720 148,926

EXCESS REVENUES OVER EXPENDITUR 825,734 720,683 834,066 438,828 732,019 775,305 580,184 (195,121)

ADJUST FOR NON-CASH - AMORTIZATIO 0 0 0 0 0 147,493 147,000 (493) ADJUST FOR NON PSAB ITEMS TSF from Prior Years Surplus - Water 0 981,216 0 0 0 0 0 - Transfer to General Fund (48,249) (57,899) (57,889) 0 0 0 0 - Transfer to Water Capital Reserve 00 0 00 0 0- Prior-Years' Surplus For Water Capital 0 (981,216) 0 0 0 0 0 - Debt Repayment - Debentures 00 0 00 0 0- Transfer to Water Capital Fund (470,664) (662,784) (508,203) 0 0 (727,184) (727,184) -

(518,913) (720,683) (566,092) 0 0 (727,184) (727,184) -

Change in Financial Equity 306,821 0 267,974 438,828 732,019 48,121 (147,000) (195,121)

Page 18 of 18 CITY OF DUNCAN BUDGET VARIANCE REPORT FOR THE 7 MONTHS ENDED July 31, 2014 2012 2013 2013 2013 2014 2014 2014 Variance FINAL BUDGET FINAL YTD YTD Projected BUDGET (Un)Favourable

REVENUES 01) Fire Protection - Cowichan Tribes 96,609 88,000 85,842 97,882 103,264 103,264 95,000 8,264 2014 estimated billing higher than 2013 and 2014 budget due to increase in assessed value ofp roperties in the service area.

02) School Taxes 1,990,658 1,990,000 1,964,112 1,964,112 1,934,505 1,934,505 2,029,800 95,295 School tax rates unknown at time of budget. School tax rates came in lower than forecast.

03) Provincial Policing Levy 247,617 250,000 267,237 267,237 273,652 273,652 255,000 18,652 Police tax rates unknown at time of budget. Police tax rates came in higher than forecast

EXPENSES 04) Human Resources Services 4,470 8,000 42,512 21,132 37,281 42,000 33,000 (9,000) Additional resources have been deployed as part of the workplace culture program; as well as additional consultant fees needed for bargaining.

05) Call Pay - Volunteers 106,272 119,000 101,432 43,094 36,576 110,824 119,000 8,176 Pay varies based on the number of calls

06) Fire Investigation & Prevention 11,876 14,500 10,760 5,777 17,307 21,000 13,100 (7,900) This includes the inspection of all public facilities at the City's expense as well as costs associated with unanticipated events such as the Dobson fire.

07) Totem Maintenance 3,584 29,196 7,343 843 4,118 7,059 15,000 7,941 Several poles were refurbished in 2013 requiring less work in 2014.

08) Commissionaires 68,989 80,500 80,334 45,147 29,544 50,646 79,500 28,854 At the time of budget, bylaw enforcement supervisor position was not Page 236of247 contemplated. Budget assumed continued 100% use of commissionaires. When this amount is combined with "other bylaw enforcement" the totals are closer to budgeted values Page 1 of 4 2012 2013 2013 2013 2014 2014 2014 Variance FINAL BUDGET FINAL YTD YTD Projected BUDGET (Un)Favourable

09) Other Bylaw Enforcement 0 1,500 61 61 14,726 25,244 100 (25,144) At the time of budget, bylaw enforcement supervisor position was not contemplated. Budget assumed continued 100% use of commissionaires. When this amount is combined with "other bylaw enforcement" the totals are closer to budgeted values

10) Transit Pass Rebate Program 438 15,000 3,534 1,602 2,184 3,744 15,000 11,256 It was hoped that increased participation would come this year, but it has only increased a small amount thus far.

11) 36 91 Case Loader 6,037 11,125 3,442 947 11,159 19,130 3,650 (15,480) The loader has required a lot of repairs so far this year.

12) 44 1994 Elgin Sweeper 50,739 44,156 54,357 17,959 10,119 17,346 50,637 33,291 A new sweeper schedule has been instituted this year, it is helping ensure the sweeper and its parts last longer.

13) 56 2006 New Holland Backhoe 16,658 16,454 8,552 6,391 3,127 5,360 14,977 9,617 The backhoe has not seen as much use as predicted so far this year.

14) Other Programs - e.g. Yard waste 0 13,795 3,559 1,701 1,535 30,000 48,000 18,000 Budget for yard waste assumed maximum participation. Actual results have started more slowly.

15) Organics Disposal 15,989 15,382 15,482 9,577 6,367 10,915 17,000 6,085 Tipping fees decreased in September of 2013, but were not accounted for in the budget.

16) McAdam Park 58,516 77,000 56,876 32,849 36,932 63,312 77,000 13,688 Sprinkler project has been taking a lot of the focus so less maintenance has been required.

17) Downtown Area 108,716 107,200 141,978 75,486 58,809 100,816 113,112 12,296 Less work has been needed with respect to downtown than originally anticipated. Page 237of247 18) School Taxes 1,990,658 1,990,000 1,964,112 1,964,112 1,934,505 1,934,505 2,029,800 95,295 School tax rates unknown at time of budget. School tax rates came in lower than forecast. Page 2 of 4 2012 2013 2013 2013 2014 2014 2014 Variance FINAL BUDGET FINAL YTD YTD Projected BUDGET (Un)Favourable 19) Provincial Policing Levy 247,617 250,000 267,237 267,237 273,652 273,652 255,000 (18,652) Police tax rates unknown at time of budget. Police tax rates came in higher than forecast

SEWER FUND 20) Sewer User Fees 568,096 597,369 607,355 606,990 628,336 628,336 637,613 (9,277)

Variance in budget is reasonable given overall amount of revenue.

21) Return on Investments 15,360 14,900 13,535 6,546 13,064 22,395 12,000 10,395 Budget projections were made based on 2013 when some losses were experienced in the bond fund. Interest has been favourable in 2014.

22) System Maintenance 70,723 75,000 63,241 25,462 33,642 57,673 75,000 17,327 Budgeted to ensure enough funds to handle a break or other occurrence. This has not occurred so far in 2014.

23) Marchmont Street Station 37,460 40,000 44,719 27,378 18,531 31,767 45,798 14,031 Budgeted based on the amount of work needed in 2013, this hasn't been necessary thus far in 2014

24) Pumping - Lift Stations 28,302 27,000 44,847 23,330 13,011 22,305 34,773 12,468 Some lift station improvements were included in the capital budget, so less operating funds are required.

WATER FUND 25) North Cowichan I Flat Rate 313,378 325,072 333,614 166,425 178,260 356,520 346,959 9,561 Increased number of users in NC

26) Interest on Investment 61,276 40,000 50,135 24,921 46,553 79,806 50,000 29,806 Budget projections were made based on 2013 when some losses were experienced in the bond fund. Interest has been favourable in 2014.

27) General System Maintenance 35,204 42,019 35,268 11,149 17,144 29,390 42,834 13,444

Water expenditures are budgeted based on the worst case scenario Page 238of247 in case there are water breaks or other issues which must be dealt with. It is impossible to predict when these instances may occur. Page 3 of 4 2012 2013 2013 2013 2014 2014 2014 Variance FINAL BUDGET FINAL YTD YTD Projected BUDGET (Un)Favourable 28) City System Maintenance 86,029 98,700 101,190 33,961 61,532 105,484 98,700 (6,784) The budget is set conservatively as costs of breaks are unpredictable.

29) North Cowichan System Maintenance 85,694 101,501 124,393 54,426 43,385 74,375 100,000 25,625 The budget is set conservatively as costs of breaks are unpredictable.

30) Eagle Heights Maintenance 35,983 49,000 45,533 23,492 24,241 41,555 49,000 7,445 The budget is set conservatively as costs of breaks are unpredictable.

31) Cowichan Tribes Maintenance 2,641 21,000 6,944 1,795 7,981 13,681 21,000 7,319 The budget is set conservatively as costs of breaks are unpredictable.

32) Pumphouse No. 2 92,844 93,164 74,097 38,270 32,858 56,327 91,164 34,837 Budget is always conservative due to uncontrollable instances requiring additional maintenance.

33) Pumphouse No. 3 7,014 15,325 4,734 3,328 2,115 3,626 15,325 11,699

Water expenditures are budgeted based on the worst case scenario in case there are water breaks or other issues which must be dealt with. It is impossible to predict when these instances may occur.

34) Pumphouse No. 4 38,868 60,000 45,614 17,195 25,447 43,623 60,000 16,377 Budget is always conservative due to uncontrollable instances requiring additional maintenance.

35) Eagle Heights Pumphouse 17,933 19,025 12,971 9,456 7,110 12,188 19,304 7,116 Budget is always conservative due to uncontrollable instances requiring additional maintenance.

36) Gibbins Road Pump & Reservoir 25,385 30,250 15,268 8,400 10,232 17,540 32,750 15,210 Budget is always conservative due to uncontrollable instances requiring additional maintenance. Page 239of247

Page 4 of 4 2014 Capital 2014 2014 2014 YTD Projected Budget Variance Notes Total General Fund Budget 492,118 2,252,717 3,033,281 780,564 General Government City Hall Building Capital (Paint,etc) 300 24,000 24,000 - Office Equip (Computers, servers, etc.) 24,047 35,000 40,000 5,000 City Hall Heating and Cooling 212,795 235,608 253,000 17,392 Project came in under budget Wayfinding Implementation 14,270 66,000 66,000 - City Hall Accessibility Modifications - 12,456 10,000 (2,456) City Hall Flat Roof 32,920 26,985 40,000 13,015 Project came in under budget Fire Department Fire Department - 10,609 10,609 - Fire Department - Turn Out Gear 2,169 11,000 11,000 - Fire Department - Rest of Roof The roof will likely be replaced in conjunction 518 - 45,000 45,000 with seismic upgrade. Fire Hall Seismic Upgrade Initial estimates have come in higher than 2,716 700,000 650,000 (50,000) expected Public Works Department Scada Monitoring App - 5,000 5,000 - PW Small Equipment - 6,000 5,000 (1,000) PW HVAC system 2,070 34,749 26,000 (8,749) RFP resulted in higher costs than anticipated New Flat Deck Truck - 85,000 85,000 - Replace Parks Trailer Unit #49 - 13,152 13,152 -

Honda Fit Purchase approved by resolution, but not in 19,177 19,877 - (19,877) initial budget Roads Roads Capital Management Plan - 65,000 65,000 - Lakes Road Fr. North and East to Trunk Rd - 50,000 50,000 - Based on approved RFP plus some Dogwood Arbutus to Hemlock - 150,000 165,000 15,000 contingency Station Street Canada to Craig 64,063 64,063 65,000 937 Cedar Ave Govt to Arbutus - - 120,000 120,000 Engineering in 2014, 2015 construction Pedestrian Improvements Sidewalk Property Purchases - - 10,000 10,000 Likely no property to be purchased this year Station Street Concrete rep & brick crosswalk 24,431 24,431 30,000 5,569 Charles Hoey Railway Crossing 2,000 35,000 35,000 - Craig Street Sidewalk - Red Balloon Frontage 26,933 26,933 40,000 13,067 Project now complete Page 240of247 Active Transportation Plan Implementation - - 350,000 350,000 Plan not yet approved End of Station Street - - 9,000 9,000 Project likely delayed 2015 2014 Capital 2014 2014 2014 YTD Projected Budget Variance Notes Traffic Improvements 4,129 20,000 10,000 (10,000) Trunk/Duncan/Cowichan Way Lights Canada/Trunk intersection ugrade - 5,000 50,000 45,000 Engineering in 2014, 2015 construction 46,988 70,000 75,000 5,000 Ingram Street/Canada Ave. Intersection, Detail Design Property Purchases - 75,000 100,000 25,000 Budget in case desirable property available. Storm Improvements Dogwood Concrete prior to pavin - 30,000 30,000 - Dike Infrastructure 57,148 57,148 - Storm Study Master Plan Engineering and Design - 51,872 51,872 - Storm Catch Basin Upgrades (associated with paving) - 20,000 20,000 - Marchmont Pump Station Flood Proofing - 15,000 15,000 - Cedar Ave Storm Main Trunk Rd West - - 160,000 160,000 Engineering in 2014, 2015 construction Cedar Ave Curb work prior to paving - - 30,000 30,000 Engineering in 2014, 2015 construction Parks & Cultural Services Canada Ave washroom accessibility improvements - 15,000 15,000 - Ramp to City Dike - 25,000 25,000 - Irrigation Communication Control Upgrade - 10,000 10,000 - Xmas Decorations 5,334 5,334 5,000 (334) Litter Baskets and Street Furniture - 5,000 5,000 - Public Art RFP 6,250 12,500 12,500 - Centennial Park - Tennis Backboard/Horseshoe Pit - - 4,000 4,000 Centennial Park - Outdoor Exercise Equipment - 25,000 25,000 - Kenneth St Hedge Replacement - 15,000 15,000 - McAdam park irrigation upgrade - 35,000 35,000 - Canada Ave Hedge Replacement 1,008 50,000 50,000 - Tree Planting - Urban Forest Strategy Project - 10,000 10,000 - - Page 241of247 2014 Capital 2014 2014 2014 YTD Projected Budget Variance Notes Total Sewer 41,652 290,252 603,550 313,298 - Shared PW capital 22,550 22,550 - Portable Power Generator 36,702 36,702 40,000 3,298 Third Street Scada and Level Monitoring 4,950 20,000 20,000 - Marchmont Scada Monitoring 10,000 10,000 - 60,000 60,000 - Marchmont Pump Station Flood Proofing Marchmont Pump Station Power Correction 6,000 6,000 - Dogwood Sanitary main spot repairs 50,000 50,000 - JUB Capital 15,000 15,000 - Silver Bridge Trailer Park - New Pump Station Project contingent on other factors out of our - 180,000 180,000 control 70,000 70,000 - Sewer Repair Various Locations - From Video Inspection Cedar Avenue - 50,000 50,000 Engineering in 2014, 2015 construction - 80,000 80,000 Project likely delayed 2015 Wraggs Alley Sewer Main Replacement - - Total Water 121,694 1,721,602 2,292,628 571,026 - Shared PW capital 22,550 22,550 - Gibbins water level monitoring 3,000 5,000 5,000 - 10,000 Well # 2 Flow Meter 10,000 - Well #3 Building New Roof 1,653 4,000 6,000 2,000 Well #3 Stand-By Generator 225,000 225,000 - Well #4 Building New Roof 6,000 6,000 - Well #4 Power Factor Correction 6,000 6,000 - Well #5 Flow meter 10,000 10,000 - Metering - Commercial 55,748 70,000 75,000 5,000 Metering - Residential 437,503 437,503 - HWY Crossing @ Christopher - 20,000 20,000 Project likely delayed 2015 Tie-in @ Polkey Road & HWY - 15,000 15,000 Project likely delayed 2015 Gibbins Water Reservoir Inspection 20,000 20,000 - Dogwood Water Main Upgrade 210,000 210,000 - James Watermain Upgrade 18,015 19,100 230,000 210,900 Station Street Canada to Craig 36,549 36,549 65,000 28,451 Cedar Avenue - 175,000 175,000 Engineering in 2014, 2015 construction Page 242of247 Emergency Chlorination System 6,729 639,900 674,078 34,178 ‐ Page 243 of 247

Request for Decision

To: Committee of the Whole File No: 0340-50 Date: September 2, 2014 From: Talitha Soldera, Director of Finance Re: Exception to the Kiosk Policy

RECOMMENDATION: That Committee of the Whole authorize staff to provide an exception to the Kiosk – Portable Sales Policy for the Royal Bank (RBC) Small Business Division to have a total of four Food Truck Vendors to be present in the RBC parking lot in conjunction with October’s National Small Business Month.

BACKGROUND: The Kiosk – Portable Sales Policy permits portable sales kiosks in front of storefront businesses provided they are associated with the business but does not allow for mobile carts or trailers except mobile ice cream carts operating outside of the downtown area.

Council established a Street Vendor Working Group to suggest possible amendments to this policy and, in part, to establish criteria for the evaluation of applications for street vendors to operate on private property. Representatives of RBC approached the Street Vendor Working Group with their request.

ANALYSIS: The Royal Bank Small Business Division has requested approval to have one food truck each Friday in October (3, 10, 17 and 24) in their parking lot from approximately 7:00 am to 6:00 pm. October is National Small Business Month and RBC would like to use this as an opportunity to promote local Small Business.

The Street Vendor Working Group discussed the request at their meeting of August 21, 2014. Some concerns expressed were:  Ensuring local businesses are promoted (local meaning Cowichan Valley),  Ensuring adequate signage so that others don’t think food trucks are now permitted,  Ensuring no public property is used for the event without appropriate permits, insurance etc. As the working group does not yet have fully established criteria for evaluating such requests, it was decided that as long as the concerns expressed above are addressed, the working group was not averse to allowing the event. It was also suggested that RBC be asked to provide some data after the event such as the number of customers who visit the food truck and possibly the sales volume experienced.

Page 1 of 2 Page 244 of 247

Request for Decision – Exception to the Kiosk Policy – September 2, 2014

IMPLICATIONS: Financial: n/a Policy: Kiosk – Portable Sales Strategic Priorities: n/a Sustainability: n/a

ALTERNATE RECOMMENDATIONS: That Committee of the Whole deny the request of the Royal Bank Small Business Division.

ATTACHMENTS: Kiosk – Portable Sales Policy

Respectfully submitted,

Talitha Soldera, Director of Finance Reviewed by CAO

Page 2 of 2 Page 245 of 247

COUNCIL POLICY MANUAL

POLICY: Kiosks - Portable Sales SECTION: DEVELOPMENT SERVICES APPROVAL DATE: August 11, 1997 AMENDED DATE: July 7, 2014

POLICY:

WHEREAS Section 4.4 of Zoning Bylaw 1540 states that “The following uses shall be prohibited in all zones:

(a) a use located in whole or in part in a mobile home, tent or trailer”;

AND WHEREAS Council deems it appropriate to permit Portable Sales Kiosks;

THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED THAT as policy, Portable Sales Kiosks and tables, (but not mobile carts except as authorized below, kiosks, trailers nor tents) are permitted in the City of Duncan on the proviso that:

a.) They are associated with or belong to an existing storefront business, are not an independent franchise and are selling the same or related goods as the storefront business. b.) They are placed in front of or adjacent to the said business. c.) There is at least a width of 1.5 metres (5 feet) of sidewalk free to the curb. d.) They are present during the storefront business hours only;

AND THAT mobile ice cream carts be permitted to operate outside of the Duncan Business Improvement Area Society core and fringe areas (excluding south of Government Street) and the highway corridor provided that a valid business license is held by the cart owner.

AND THAT the following definitions apply:

“Portable” means that they may be collapsible or temporary or on wheels. “Mobile” means that they travel from one place to another selling goods or move from site to site. “Kiosk” means a light weight out-of-doors structure.

City of Duncan Current Policy: Kiosks – Portable Sales Page 1 of 1 Page 246 of 247

From: Grant M. Waldman I West Coast Men's Support Society [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Wednesday, August 20,2014 12:S9 PM To: 'Sharon Jackson' Subject: letter of Support

Hello Sharon.

I trust that this note finds you well. I am hoping that you would be wi lling to submit a letter of support to me rega rd ing the work that West Coast Men does in the community. I am attaching a sample from last year. Thanks.

In Community,

Grant M. Waldman, Executive Director jWeltness Coach West Coast Men's Support Society Ph: (250) 597 -2801 NEW TOll FREE : (855) MEN WORK (636-9675) Fx: (888) 845-3405 213·80 Station St, Duncan, BC, V9l1M4 [email protected] http: //www.westcoastmen.or9 W.... CouI Men's Support Society

"_"' ., . v',,. nature b ..,on1es "In order to succeed, your desire for success should be greater than your fear of failure." - Bill Cosby Page 247 of 247

Parliament Buildings Victoria, BC V8V 1X4 Telephone 250.387.3655 Fax 250.38734680 [email protected] .bc.ca

Community Offices: Province of British Columbia 273 Trunk Road PC Box 599 Legislative Assembly Duncan, BC V9L 3X9 Telephone 250.715-0127 Fax 250.715.0139 TolIFree 1.877.715.0127 Bill Routley, MLA (Cowichan Valley)

Grant M. Waldman, Executive Director/Wellness Coach West Coast Men's Support Society 213-80 Station St, Duncan, BC, V9L 1M4

August 20, 2014

To Whom It May Concern:

I am writing to offer my support to the West Coast Men's Support Society (WCMSS) in their efforts to apply for funding support. The WCMSS has been delivering programs on Vancouver Island for 9 years with much success, with programs offered such as "Dads make a difference", "Men's circles", One on One peer counseling and many more other resources available.

The West Coast Men's Support Society has continued to provide information, resources and support groups for men to better improve their relationship with themselves, their families, and with their community!

I have met with Grant M. Waldman the Executive Director and I am in full support of their application for funding.

If you have any questions do not hesitate in contacting me at the office. Thank you for your attention to this matter.

Yours truly,

Bill Routley MLA Cowichan Valley