DOCSLIB.ORG

Staff-Report-PD-2016-14-RE-OPR-Consultant-Selection-With-Attachment.Pdf

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Staff-Report-PD-2016-14-RE-OPR-Consultant-Selection-With-Attachment.Pdf The Corporation of The Town of Penetanguishene Committee of the Whole COMMITTEE: Planning and Community Development COMMITTEE CHAIR: Councillor Debbie Levy SUBJECT: Official Plan Review - Consultant Selection RECOMMENDATION THAT the Committee of the Whole recommends to Council acceptance of the proposal dated February 8, 2016, to retain the services of MMM Group Limited, for a maximum upset limit of $99,389.15 (includes HST) to prepare the Town’s Official Plan. INTRODUCTION A Request for Proposals (RFP) to prepare a new Official Plan was issued on January 19, 2016. The Terms of Reference and Request for proposals was circulated to ten planning consultants, posted on the Town’s website and notice was given in the Midland Mirror. On or before the deadline the following nine (9) submissions were received: Consultant Cost (including HST) MMM Group $99,389.15 Meridian Planning Consultants $76,791.96 MHBC Planning $93,251.13 Innovative Planning Solutions $99,507.80 GSP Group $98,852.40 The Jones Consulting Group $94,349.35 Skelton Brumwell $99,101.00 The Planning Partnership $99,878.00 Cambium $100,000.000 The Steering Committee met on February 23, 2016 to evaluate and review the proposals and subsequently determined that MMM Group Limited be recommended to Council to prepare the new Official Plan. ANALYSIS The Steering committee conducted a detailed review of each of the proposals and held significant discussion on them. After much discussion, with advice and input from staff, selected the proposal from MMM Group Limited (Attachment #1) as best meeting the terms and conditions of the RFP and the needs and expectations from the Steering Committee. The Steering Committee felt that a multi-disciplinary team, including a team of planners, urban designers, a cultural heritage specialist and economic/demographic specialist would be provide the expertise, guidance and leadership that the municipality was requesting as part of the RFP process. MMM Group Limited, a WSP Company, is one of Canada’s leading professional services firms, offering services in planning, engineering and geomatics with over 50 professional planners The Planning and Environmental Design Department has The Corporation of The Town of Penetanguishene Committee of the Whole extensive experience in preparing Official Plans and other planning policy documents and have provided examples of their work in the Town of Huntsville, City of Brockville and the District of Manitoulin Island. One key facet of MMM Group is their ability to draw upon the firms continuum of in-house services (e.g. marketing and graphic design, geomatics, and multiple disciplines of engineering). In the Proposal, MMM Group has also employed the Centre for Spatial Economics (C4SE), who specialize in the development of long term economic and demographic growth projections. BUDGETARY IMPLICATIONS The budget set for the Official Plan Review project is $100,000. A carry-forward amount of $35,000 is being requested as a carry forward to 2016 from the 2015 budget. Therefore, there is a $70,000 budget in 2016. The remaining $30,000 for the OPR is included in the 2017 Capital Plan. MMM Group’s work will span both fiscal years and the agreement will stipulate that the 2017 workplan is conditional upon Council approving an additional amount of $30,000 in the 2017 Capital Budget. RISK MANAGEMENT The consulting firm will provide all necessary documentation required by the Town. COMMUNICATION & MARKETING Notice of the Request for Proposals was published in the Midland Mirror and posted to the Town’s website. The Terms of Reference and Request for Proposals was provided directly to ten consulting firms in Ontario. SUSTAINABILITY Selection of a consulting firm to prepare the Town’s new Official Plan will assist in achieving the pillars of the Sustainability Plan. STRATEGIC GOALS & OBJECTIVES The retention of a consulting firm to prepare the Town’s new Official Plan with directly implement the Town to update the Official Plan while also realizing on a number of other objectives of the Strategic Plan. Prepared by: A. Betty, Director of Planning and Community Development Department Reviewed by: C. Robillard, Treasurer Reviewed by: Ted Walker, CAO Council Meeting Date: March 9, 2016 Attachment #1 Proposal from MMM Group dated February 8, 2016 Electronic File Location: S:\Planning Department\D09 - Official Plans\Official Plan Update 2015-2016\Staff Reports\Staff Report PD-2016-14 RE OPR Consultant Selection.docx\ “Sailing Forward” Proposal for an OFFICIAL PLAN REVIEW for the Town of Penetanguishene February 19, 2016 Andres Musta (CC BY-NC-ND 2.0) February 8, 2016 Andrea Betty, CIP RPP Director of Planning and Community Development 10 Robert Street W, Box 5009 Penetanguishene, Ontario L9M 2G2 Dear Ms. Betty, Re: Town of Penetanguishene Official Plan Review MMM Group Limited, a WSP company, (MMM) is pleased to submit this proposal to undertake the review of the Official Plan for the Town of Penetanguishene. Please consider this letter of submission as authorization for us to submit this proposal. We know that successful projects require a workable approach and a responsive team. MMM is often distinguished by our ability to effectively integrate multiple disciplines to address evolving municipal needs as well as our ability to offer clients experienced practitioners who can successfully complete projects on time and within budget. Staff on our Project Team, especially our Project Manager, have undertaken many Official Plan assignments across the Province and, in some cases within similar contexts. We will use our experience to undertake a Review that will reflect the community’s Vision and provide innovative solutions to local issues. We believe that we are well suited to complete this project for the Town of Penetanguishene and have put together an innovative approach to consultation and undertaking a work plan that will greatly assist the Town in its Official Plan Review. We look forward to the opportunity to work with you and thank you in advance for your consideration. Please contact me at 905-882-4211 ext. 6754 or by e-mail at [email protected] should you have any questions or comments in regards to our submission. Yours very truly, MMM GROUP LIMITED Gregory Bender, MCIP, RPP Senior Planner/Project Manager, Planning + Design Table of Contents Table of Contents ................................................................................................................... a 1.0 Introduction ................................................................................................................. 1 2.0 Company Profile ........................................................................................................... 1 2.1 MMM Group Limited, a WSP company .................................................................................... 1 2.2 Centre for Spatial Economics (C4SE) ....................................................................................... 3 3.0 Project Understanding and Approach ............................................................................. 3 3.1 Project Understanding ............................................................................................................. 3 3.2 Approach to Community Consultation and Engagement ......................................................... 4 4.0 Team ........................................................................................................................... 7 5.0 Project Experience ........................................................................................................ 9 5.1 Town of Huntsville ......................................................................................................................... 9 5.2 District of Manitoulin ................................................................................................................... 10 5.3 City of Brockville .......................................................................................................................... 10 6.0 Town Involvement ....................................................................................................... 11 7.0 Work Program ............................................................................................................. 12 Phase 1 – Setting the Stage ............................................................................................................... 12 Phase 2 – Background Study ............................................................................................................. 13 Part 2A: Creating a Vision ................................................................................................................. 13 Phase 2B – Background Study ........................................................................................................... 15 Phase 4: Draft Official Plan Amendment ............................................................................................17 Phase 5: Final Official Plan .................................................................................................................17 8.0 Schedule & Budget ..................................................................................................... 18 9.0 Conclusion .................................................................................................................. 21 Appendix A – Corporate Profile Appendix B - Curricula Vitae Town of Penetanguishene | Official Plan Review MMM Group Limited | February 2016
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Transit Planning in Toronto: Roles, Priorities and Our Decision Making Framework
    INFORMATION ONLY ____________________________________________________________________________ Subject: Transit Planning in Toronto: roles, priorities and our decision making framework Date: July 29, 2015 At the TTC Board meeting on July 29, 2015, Jennifer Keesmaat, Chief Planner, City of Toronto will deliver a presentation titled “Transit Planning in Toronto: roles, priorities and our decision making framework.” Original signed by Vincent Rodo Chief Financial & Administration Officer 1-17 Transit Planning in Toronto: Roles, Priorities and our decision making framework TTC Board Meeting July 29, 2015 Jennifer Keesmaat, Chief Planner and Executive Director City Planning Division PLANNING A GREAT CITY, TOGETHER Overview of Presentation 1. Role of the City Planning Division in Transit Planning 2. Key Transit Planning Projects • SmartTrack/RER • Relief Line Project Assessment • Scarborough Subway Extension Project Assessment • Metrolinx LRT Program • King Streetcar Enhancements • “Feeling Congested?” Transportation Official Plan Review ruill_TORDNIO 2 City Planning Division PROGRAMS • Application Review • Business Performance & Standards • Civic Design • Committee of Adjustment • Design Review • Community Policy • Environmental Planning • Graphics & Visualization • Heritage Preservation • Official Plan & Zoning By-law • Outreach and Engagement • Public Art • Research & Information • Strategic Initiatives • Transit Planning • Waterfront Renewal 3 Transit Implementation Unit Objective Transit planning in the City of Toronto requires a transparent,
    [Show full text]
  • Rapid Transit in Toronto Levyrapidtransit.Ca TABLE of CONTENTS
    The Neptis Foundation has collaborated with Edward J. Levy to publish this history of rapid transit proposals for the City of Toronto. Given Neptis’s focus on regional issues, we have supported Levy’s work because it demon- strates clearly that regional rapid transit cannot function eff ectively without a well-designed network at the core of the region. Toronto does not yet have such a network, as you will discover through the maps and historical photographs in this interactive web-book. We hope the material will contribute to ongoing debates on the need to create such a network. This web-book would not been produced without the vital eff orts of Philippa Campsie and Brent Gilliard, who have worked with Mr. Levy over two years to organize, edit, and present the volumes of text and illustrations. 1 Rapid Transit in Toronto levyrapidtransit.ca TABLE OF CONTENTS 6 INTRODUCTION 7 About this Book 9 Edward J. Levy 11 A Note from the Neptis Foundation 13 Author’s Note 16 Author’s Guiding Principle: The Need for a Network 18 Executive Summary 24 PART ONE: EARLY PLANNING FOR RAPID TRANSIT 1909 – 1945 CHAPTER 1: THE BEGINNING OF RAPID TRANSIT PLANNING IN TORONTO 25 1.0 Summary 26 1.1 The Story Begins 29 1.2 The First Subway Proposal 32 1.3 The Jacobs & Davies Report: Prescient but Premature 34 1.4 Putting the Proposal in Context CHAPTER 2: “The Rapid Transit System of the Future” and a Look Ahead, 1911 – 1913 36 2.0 Summary 37 2.1 The Evolving Vision, 1911 40 2.2 The Arnold Report: The Subway Alternative, 1912 44 2.3 Crossing the Valley CHAPTER 3: R.C.
    [Show full text]
  • Transportation Needs
    Chapter 2 – Transportation Needs 407 TRANSITWAY – WEST OF BRANT STREET TO WEST OF HURONTARIO STREET MINISTRY OF TRANSPORTATION - CENTRAL REGION 2.6.4. Sensitivity Analysis 2-20 TABLE OF CONTENTS 2.7. Systems Planning – Summary of Findings 2-21 2. TRANSPORTATION NEEDS 2-1 2.1. Introduction 2-1 2.1.1. Background 2-1 2.1.2. Scope of Systems Planning 2-1 2.1.3. Study Corridor 2-1 2.1.4. Approach 2-2 2.1.5. Overview of the Chapter 2-2 2.2. Existing Conditions and Past Trends 2-2 2.2.1. Current Land Use 2-2 2.2.2. Transportation System 2-3 2.2.3. Historic Travel Trends 2-4 2.2.4. Current Demands and System Performance 2-5 2.3. Future Conditions 2-7 2.3.1. Land Use Changes 2-7 2.3.2. Transportation Network Changes 2-8 2.3.3. Changes in Travel Patterns 2-9 2.3.4. Future Demand and System Performance 2-10 2.4. Service Concept 2-13 2.4.1. Operating Characteristics 2-13 2.4.2. Conceptual Operating and Service Strategy 2-13 2.5. Vehicle Maintenance and Storage support 2-14 2.5.1. Facility Need 2-14 2.5.2. West Yard – Capacity Assessment 2-15 2.5.3. West Yard – Location 2-15 2.6. Transitway Ridership Forecasts 2-15 2.6.1. Strategic Forecasts 2-15 2.6.2. Station Evaluation 2-17 2.6.3. Revised Forecasts 2-18 DRAFT 2-0 . Update ridership forecasts to the 2041 horizon; 2.
    [Show full text]
  • Feeling Congested?" – Update on Progress to Date
    STAFF REPORT ACTION REQUIRED "Feeling Congested?" – Update on Progress to Date Date: May 26, 2014 To: Planning and Growth Management Committee From: Chief Planner and Executive Director, City Planning Division Wards: All Reference P:\2014\ClusterB\PLN\PGMC\PG14076 Number: SUMMARY The current review of the Official Plan's transportation policies has been divided into two approval streams. One set of policy amendments is proceeding towards final approval within this term of Council, while the remainder continue under review with a target approval date of early 2015. This latter set of policies comprises four important transportation planning areas, namely: Rapid Transit Evaluation Framework (RTEF); Surface Transit Network; Cycling Policy Framework; and Street Related Maps and Schedules. This report provides an update on the progress being made on the ongoing review of these four transportation policy areas. RECOMMENDATIONS The Chief Planner and Executive Director, City Planning Division recommends that: 1. The Planning and Growth Management Committee receive this report for information Financial Impact There are no financial impacts resulting from the adoption of this report. Staff report for action on "Feeling Congested?" Update Report 1 DECISION HISTORY Section 26 of the Planning Act requires each municipality to conduct a review of its Official Plan within five years of it coming into force. At its meeting in May, 2011, the Planning and Growth Management Committee adopted, with amendment, the Chief Planner’s recommendations regarding the general work programme and public consultation strategy for the City’s Five Year Official Plan Review and Municipal Comprehensive Review contained in PG5.2 Five Year Review of the Official Plan and Municipal Comprehensive Review.
    [Show full text]
  • Applying Life Cycle Assessment to Analyze the Environmental Sustainability of Public Transit Modes for the City of Toronto
    Applying life cycle assessment to analyze the environmental sustainability of public transit modes for the City of Toronto by Ashton Ruby Taylor A thesis submitted to the Department of Geography & Planning in conformity with the requirements for the Degree of Master of Science Queen’s University Kingston, Ontario, Canada September, 2016 Copyright © Ashton Ruby Taylor, 2016 Abstract One challenge related to transit planning is selecting the appropriate mode: bus, light rail transit (LRT), regional express rail (RER), or subway. This project uses data from life cycle assessment to develop a tool to measure energy requirements for different modes of transit, on a per passenger-kilometer basis. For each of the four transit modes listed, a range of energy requirements associated with different vehicle models and manufacturers was developed. The tool demonstrated that there are distinct ranges where specific transit modes are the best choice. Diesel buses are the clear best choice from 7-51 passengers, LRTs make the most sense from 201-427 passengers, and subways are the best choice above 918 passengers. There are a number of other passenger loading ranges where more than one transit mode makes sense; in particular, LRT and RER represent very energy-efficient options for ridership ranging from 200 to 900 passengers. The tool developed in the thesis was used to analyze the Bloor-Danforth subway line in Toronto using estimated ridership for weekday morning peak hours. It was found that ridership across the line is for the most part actually insufficient to justify subways over LRTs or RER. This suggests that extensions to the existing Bloor-Danforth line should consider LRT options, which could service the passenger loads at the ends of the line with far greater energy efficiency.
    [Show full text]
  • DS-16-163 Metrolinx
    DS-16-163 Discussion Paper for the Next Regional Transportation Plan GREATER TORONTO AND HAMILTON AREA AUGUST 2016 ABOUT METROLINX AND THE REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION PLAN As the regional transportation agency for the Greater Toronto and Hamilton Area (GTHA), Metrolinx is committed to planning, building and operating transportation that supports a high quality of life, a thriving, sustainable and protected environment and a strong, prosperous and competitive economy. Under provincial legislation, Metrolinx has a mandate to provide leadership in the co-ordination, planning, financing, development and implementation of an integrated, multi-modal transportation network that conforms with the policies of Ontario’s Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe and complies with other provincial transportation policies and plans in the regional transportation plan area. Metrolinx is also responsible for the operation of the regional transit system, GO Transit, the PRESTO electronic fare payment system and the UP Express airport rail link. Metrolinx works closely with provincial ministries and the region’s municipalities and transit agencies to implement the Regional Transportation Plan, and engages with civic, academic, business and community partners to realize the collective vision for the region’s transportation system, as set out in the Regional Transportation Plan. As Metrolinx embarks on a review of The Big Move – the first Regional Transportation Plan – we are marking a decade of championing multi-modal, connected and integrated mobility
    [Show full text]
  • General Committee Agenda
    AGENDA GENERAL COMMITTEE THE CORPORATION OF THE CITY OF MISSISSAUGA www.mlsslssauga.ca WEDNESDAY, JANUARY 30, 2013 - 9:00 A.M. COUNCIL CHAMBER - 2nd FLOOR - CIVIC CENTRE 300 CITY CENTRE DRIVE, MISSISSAUGA, ONTARIO, L5B 3Cl Members Mayor Hazel McCallion Councillor Jim Tovey Ward 1 Councillor Pat Mullin Ward 2 Councillor Chris Fonseca Ward 3 (Chair) Councillor Frank Dale Ward 4 Councillor Bonnie Crombie Ward 5 Councillor Ron Starr Ward 6 Councillor Nando Iannicca Ward 7 Councillor Katie Mahoney Ward 8 Councillor Pat Saito Ward 9 Councillor Sue McFadden Ward 10 Councillor George Carlson Ward 11 Contact: Sacha Smith, Legislative Coordinator, Office of the City Clerk 905-615-3200 ext. 4516 / Fax 905-615-4181 [email protected] General Committee - I - January 30, 2013 INDEX - GENERAL COMMITTEE - JANUARY 30, 2013 CALL TO ORDER DECLARATIONS OF DIRECT (OR INDIRECT) PECUNIARY INTEREST APPROVAL OF THE AGENDA PRESENTATIONS DEPUTATIONS A. Item 1 Maeghan Eastwood, Terrestrial Ecologist, Toronto Regional Conservation Authority with respect to the Peel Regional Urban Forestry Strategy MATTERS TO BE CONSIDERED I. Highway 403/QEW Improvements Preliminary Design and Class Environmental Assessment 2. Update regarding Metrolinx's The Big Move - the Regional Transportation Plan (RTP) for the Greater Toronto and Hamilton Area (GTHA) ADVISORY COMMITTEE REPORTS Environmental Advisory Committee - Report 9-2012 - December II, 2012 Mississauga Cycling Advisory Committee - Report 1-2013 - January 8, 2013 Mississauga Accessibility Advisory Committee - Report
    [Show full text]
  • Report Template
    Erinview Independent Senior’s Living Parking Justification Paradigm Transportation Solutions Limited March 2018 Project Number Erinview Independent Senior’s Living Parking 170296 Justification March 2018 Client Sifton Properties Limited 195 Dufferin Avenue, Suite 800 London ON N6A 1K7 Client Contact Maureen Zunti, MCIP, RPP Signatures and Seals Consultant Project Team Stewart Elkins B.E.S., MITE Scott Catton, Dipl. T., C.E.T., MITE Signature Disclaimer This document has been prepared for the titled project or named part thereof (the “project”) and except for approval and commenting municipalities and agencies in their review and approval of this project, should not be relied upon or used for any other project without an independent check being carried out as to its suitability and prior written authorization of Paradigm Transportation Solutions Limited being obtained. Paradigm Transportation Solutions Limited accepts no responsibility or liability for the consequence of this document being used for a purpose other than the project for which it was commissioned. Any person using or relying on the document for such other purpose agrees, and will by such use or reliance be taken to confirm their agreement to indemnify Paradigm Transportation Solutions Limited for all loss or damage resulting there from. Paradigm Transportation Solutions Limited accepts no responsibility or liability for this document to any party other than the person by whom it was commissioned and the approval and commenting municipalities and agencies Paradigm Transportation
    [Show full text]
  • Planning Justification Report
    THIS DRAWING, AS AN INSTRUMENT OF SERVICE, IS PROVIDED BY AND IS THE PROPERTY OF GRAZIANI+CORAZZA ARCHITECTS INC. THE CONTRACTOR MUST VERIFY AND ACCEPT RESPONSIBILITY FOR ALL DIMENSIONS AND CONDITIONS ON SITE AND MUST NOTIFY GRAZIANI+CORAZZA ARCHITECTS INC. OF ANY VARIATIONS FROM THE SUPPLIED INFORMATION. GRAZIANI+CORAZZA ARCHITECTS INC. IS NOT RESPONSIBLE FOR THE ACCURACY OF SURVEY, STRUCTURAL, MECHANICAL, ELECTRICAL, AND OTHER ENGINEERING INFORMATION SHOWN ON THIS DRAWING. REFER TO THE APPROPRIATE ENGINEERING DRAWINGS BEFORE PROCEEDING WITH THE WORK. CONSTRUCTION MUST CONFORM TO ALL APPLICABLE CODES AND REQUIREMENTS OF THE AUTHORITIES HAVING JURISDICTION. UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED, NO INVESTIGATION HAS BEEN UNDERTAKEN OR REPORTED ON BY THIS OFFICE IN REGARDS TO THE ENVIRONMENTAL CONDITION OF THIS SITE. THIS DRAWING IS NOT TO BE SCALED. ALL ARCHITECTURAL SYMBOLS INDICATED ON THIS DRAWING ARE GRAPHIC REPRESENTATIONS ONLY. CONDITIONS FOR ELECTRONIC INFORMATION TRANSFER: ELECTRONIC INFORMATION IS SUPPLIED TO THE OTHER ASSOCIATED FIRMS TO ASSIST THEM IN THE EXECUTION OF THEIR WORK / REVIEW. THE RECIPIENT FIRMS MUST DETERMINE THE COMPLETENESS / APPROPRIATENESS / RELEVANCE OF THE INFORMATION IN RESPECT TO THEIR PARTICULAR RESPONSIBILITY. GRAZIANI+CORAZZA ARCHITECTS INC. SHALL NOT BE RESPONSIBLE FOR: 1. ERRORS, OMISSIONS, INCOMPLETENESS DUE TO LOSS OF INFORMATION IN WHOLE OR PART WHEN INFORMATION IS TRANSFERRED. 2. TRANSMISSION OF ANY VIRUS OR DAMAGE TO THE RECEIVING ELECTRONIC SYSTEM WHEN INFORMATION IS TRANSFERRED. APRIL PREPARED FOR: 2683340 Ontario Inc. 2021 PLANNING JUSTIFICATION REPORT 255 Dundas Street West, Mississauga issued for revisions 1320 SHAWSON DRIVE, SUITE 100 MISSISSAUGA, ONTARIO L4W 1C3 T.905.795.2601 F.905.795.2844 WWW.GC-ARCHITECTS.COM Mixed Use 255 DUNDAS 255 Dundas St.
    [Show full text]
  • APPENDIX F1 Legislative Context Halton Region Transportation Master Plan
    APPENDIX F1 Legislative Context Halton Region Transportation Master Plan Legislative Context Contents Page 1. LEGISLATIVE CONTEXT.........................................................................................................................1 1.1 2005 Provincial Policy Statement ......................................................................................3 1.2 Greenbelt Act (2005)...............................................................................................................3 1.3 Places to Grow Act, 2005 (Bill 136)...................................................................................4 1.4 Halton Region Official Plan Amendment 38 (ROPA 38)............................................4 1.5 Metrolinx’s “The Big Move” – Regional Transportation Plan .................................6 1.6 Bill 163 ..........................................................................................................................................8 1.7 Transportation Provincial Policy Statements (TPPS)................................................9 2. THE INFLUENCE OF ACTS AND POLICIES ON THE HALTON TRANSPORTATION MASTER PLAN..................................................................................................... 10 i 1. Legislative Context The last Regional Transportation Master Plan was prepared in 2004. Since that time, there have been a number of provincial and regional guiding documents released to which the Region’s transportation strategy must now conform. This discussion paper presents a
    [Show full text]
  • Dundas BRT Initial Business Case September 2020
    Dundas BRT Initial Business Case September 2020 Dundas BRT Initial Business Case Draft Report September 2020 Contents Executive Summary 1 Scope 1 Findings 5 Strategic Case 5 Economic Case 5 Financial Case 6 Deliverability and Operations Case 6 Summary 7 Introduction 10 Introduction 11 Purpose of this Report 11 Dundas BRT Initial Business Case Background 11 Document Structure 12 The Case for Change 13 Introduction 14 The Need for Regional Transportation Investment: Managing Growth and Congestion 14 Existing Transit in the GTHA 14 Problem Statement: Liveability and Development on Dundas are Constrained by the Transportation Network 17 Issue 1 – Uncompetitive and fragmented transit services along the corridor 17 Issue 2 – Rapid Population and Employment Growth Leads to Higher Travel Demand 31 What Happens if this Problem is Not Addressed? 35 The Opportunity: Develop a Connected Transit Service 36 The Solution: Community Integration with BRT 38 Overview 38 Why BRT? 39 BRT Alignment with Plans and Policies 41 BRT and Land Use Development 45 BRT Strategic Framework 48 Investment Options 50 Introduction 51 Option Development Process 51 Overview 51 Step 1 – Review previous studies, plans and proposals 51 Step 2 – Identify high potential employment and population centres to service 55 Step 3 – High Level Service Planning and Step 4 – Option Refinement 55 Option Overview 57 Detailed Option Scoping: Costing and Ridership Forecasting 61 vii Overview 61 Costs 61 Alignment 62 Stations 66 Operations and Maintenance Centre 67 Fleet Capital Costs and Operating
    [Show full text]
  • Cawthra Road from QEW to Eastgate Parkway: Corridor and Intersection Improvements Class Environmental Assessment (Class EA) Study
    Cawthra Road from QEW to Eastgate Parkway: Corridor and Intersection Improvements Class Environmental Assessment (Class EA) Study Project File Report November 2020 Cawthra Road from QEW to Eastgate Parkway: Corridor and Intersection Improvements Class EA Study, Project File Report, November 2020 TABLE OF CONTENTS 1. INTRODUCTION ..................................................................................................................................... 1 Purpose ......................................................................................................................................... 1 Study Area ..................................................................................................................................... 1 Study Team ................................................................................................................................... 4 Schedule ........................................................................................................................................ 5 2. CLASS ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT ................................................................................................ 6 2.1 Planning and Design Process ........................................................................................................ 6 2.2 Public Review Period ..................................................................................................................... 8 3. PHASE 1: PROBLEM AND OPPORTUNITY ..........................................................................................
    [Show full text]