John Hemingway, Mira Vervoorn and Nancy

LPAT Case Nos. PL171084 PL180158 PL180580 MM180022 MM170004

LOCAL PLANNING APPEAL TRIBUNAL Tribunal d’appel de l’aménagement local

PROCEEDING COMMENCED UNDER subsection 22(7) of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P. 13, as amended Applicant and Appellant: ClubLink Corporation ULC and ClubLink Holdings Ltd. Subject: Request to amend the Official Plan - Refusal of request by the Town of Oakville Existing Designation: Private Open Space and Natural Area Proposed Designation: Site Specific (to be determined) – including Residential, Mixed Use and Community Commercial Purpose: To permit the redevelopment of the Subject Lands for a mix of residential, commercial and open space uses Property Address/Description: 1333 Dorval Drive Municipality: Town of Oakville Approval Authority File No.: OPA.1519.09 LPAT Case No.: PL171084 LPAT File No.: PL171084 LPAT Case Name: ClubLink Corporation ULC v. Oakville (Town)

PROCEEDING COMMENCED UNDER subsection 34(11) of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P. 13, as amended Applicant and Appellant: ClubLink Corporation ULC and ClubLink Holdings Ltd. Subject: Application to amend Zoning By-law No. 2014-014 - Refusal of Application by the Town of Oakville Existing Zoning: Private Open Space (O2), Private Open Space-Special (O2- Sp. 114), and Natural Area (N) Proposed Zoning: Site Specific (to be determined) Purpose: To permit the redevelopment of the Subject Lands for a mix of residential, commercial and open space uses Property Address/Description: 1333 Dorval Drive Municipality: Town of Oakville Municipality File No.: Z.1519.09 LPAT Case No.: PL171084 LPAT File No.: PL171085

H364638-02-230-0002, Rev. A Page 1

PROCEEDING COMMENCED UNDER subsection 51(34) of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P. 13, as amended Applicant and Appellant: ClubLink Corporation ULC and ClubLink Holdings Ltd. Subject: Proposed Plan of Subdivision - Failure of the Town of Oakville to make a decision Purpose: To permit the redevelopment of the Subject Lands for a mix of residential, commercial and open space uses Property Address/Description: 1333 Dorval Drive Municipality: Town of Oakville Municipality File No.: 24T-17003/1519 LPAT Case No.: PL171084 LPAT File No.: PL171086

PROCEEDING COMMENCED UNDER subsection 51(39) of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P. 13, as amended Applicant and Appellant: ClubLink Corporation ULC and ClubLink Holdings Ltd. Subject: Proposed Plan of Subdivision Property Address/Description: 1333 Dorval Drive Municipality: Town of Oakville Municipality File No.: 24T-17003/1519 LPAT Case No.: PL171084 LPAT File No.: PL180034

H364638-02-230-0002, Rev. A Page 2

PROCEEDING COMMENCED UNDER subsection 17(24) of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P.13, as amended Appellant: ClubLink Corporation ULC & ClubLink Holdings Ltd. Subject: Proposed Official Plan Amendment No. 24 Municipality: Town of Oakville LPAT Case No.: PL180158 LPAT File No.: PL180158 LPAT Case Name: ClubLink Corporation ULC et al. v. Oakville (Town)

PROCEEDING COMMENCED UNDER subsection 34(19) of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P.13, as amended Appellant: ClubLink Corporation ULC & ClubLink Holdings Ltd. Subject: By-law No. 2018-016 Municipality: Town of Oakville LPAT Case No.: PL180158 LPAT File No.: PL180159

PROCEEDING COMMENCED UNDER subsection 17(36) of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P.13, as amended Appellant: ClubLink Corporation ULC & ClubLink Holdings Ltd. Subject: Proposed Official Plan Amendment No. 15 Municipality: Town of Oakville LPAT Case No.: PL180580 LPAT File No.: PL180580

PROCEEDING COMMENCED UNDER subsection 17(36) of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P.13, as amended Appellant: ClubLink Corporation ULC & ClubLink Holdings Ltd. Subject: Proposed Official Plan Amendment No. 16 Municipality: Town of Oakville L.P.A.T. Case No.: PL180580 L.P.A.T. File No.: PL180581

H364638-02-230-0002, Rev. A Page 3

PROCEEDING COMMENCED UNDER subsection 34.1(1) of the Ontario Heritage Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. O.18, as amended Appellant: ClubLink Corporation ULC & ClubLink Holdings Ltd. Subject: Appeal of a decision of Council on an application to demolish a building or structure Municipality: Town of Oakville LPAT Case No.: MM180022 LPAT File No.: MM180022

PROCEEDING COMMENCED UNDER subsection 69(3) of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P.13, as amended Appellant: ClubLink Corporation ULC & ClubLink Holdings Ltd. Subject: Appeal against the levying of an application fee Municipality: Town of Oakville LPAT Case No.: MM170004 LPAT File No.: MM170004

H364638-02-230-0002, Rev. A Page 4

WITNESS STATEMENT OF JOHN HEMINGWAY, MIRA VERVOORN, AND NANCY HUI PL171084 PL180580 PL180158

A. QUALIFICATIONS

1. John Hemingway is a licensed Professional Engineer with over 40 years of experience in the planning, designing and delivering of transportation infrastructure and services across Canada. He is certified as a Professional Traffic Operations Engineer by the Transportation Professional Certification Board of the Institute of Transportation Engineers.

2. Mr. Hemingway’s areas of specialization include conceptual planning, feasibility studies, traffic operations and safety studies and traffic management plan development. He has experience in transit planning including the interconnection of transit services.

3. He is currently a Principal Project Manager at Hatch.

4. Mira Vervoorn is a licensed Professional Engineer with 16 years of experience in transportation planning and traffic engineering. She has undertaken projects involving transportation modelling, corridor assessments and planning, traffic operation assessments, parking operations management studies and transportation impact assessments. She has experience in infrastructure transit and transportation projects specifically related to municipal planning and design work with focus on multi-modal assessments. She has led projects involving major multi-modal transit hubs.

5. She is currently the Regional Lead for Transportation Planning and Traffic Engineering at Hatch.

6. Nancy Hui is an engineering analyst with a Masters of Applied Science in Transportation Engineering. She is experienced in the design and evaluation of transit stations and other multimodal facilities. She has developed transit ridership forecasts, conducted analyses of the economic costs and benefits associated with various modes of travel, including travel

H364638-02-230-0002, Rev. A Page 5

times savings, greenhouse gas reduction, and health benefits. She is currently a Transportation Analyst at Hatch.

7. Curriculum Vitae and the Acknowledgements of Expert Duty are attached as Appendix A.

B. RETAINER

8. John Hemingway, Mira Vervoorn and Nancy Hui were retained in November 2020 to provide expert opinion on transportation planning matters related to the proposed development of the Glen Abbey Golf Course.

C. LIST OF MATTERS TO BE ADDRESSED IN EVIDENCE

9. Matters of transportation including traffic and transit planning and forecasting will be addressed.

10. The list of documents reviewed in preparation of this Witness Statement is attached as Appendix B.

D. SUMMARY OF OPINIONS

11. Brief Description of the Applications:

11.1 The applicant proposes a mixed-use development to be located at the site of the existing Glen Abbey golf course, with 3,222 new residential units, 5840 m2 retail space, and 5,430 m2 office space (the “Proposed Development”).

11.2 The applicant’s traffic consultant (“BA Group” or “BA”) forecast that the Proposed Development will generate approximately 1,400 to 1,600 peak hour vehicle trips at full build-out.

11.3 Access to the Proposed Development will primarily be provided via “Street A”, a new proposed major collector road that connects Dorval Drive and Upper Middle Road West.

11.4 BA proposes that transit access to the Proposed Development will be provided by basic bus service on a new route with buses running twice an hour during the peak hours mostly through existing low density residential neighbourhoods connecting to Uptown Oakville and Oakville GO Station (the “Proposed Route”).

H364638-02-230-0002, Rev. A Page 6

12. Overall Conclusions:

Transit

12.1 The Proposed Development is not transit-supportive because it lacks key transit- supportive characteristics. The Proposed Development will result in a large, highly car-dependent community.

12.2 The transit service recommended by BA on the Proposed Route entails thirty- minute headways in the peak hour on a circuitous route. This service would be comparable to that of existing basic low density neighbourhood transit services. The Proposed Route will primarily serve as a commuter route between the Proposed Development and the GO stations for the residents and workers at the Proposed Development.

12.3 The characteristics of the Proposed Route make it unlikely to attract new riders along the route or to increase the transit mode share at the Proposed Development over what might be expected in a traditional low density neighbourhood. These characteristics include:

12.3.1 Transit travel times which are not competitive with automobile travel times;

12.3.2 The predominance of low density mature residential neighbourhoods along the route which results in:

12.3.2.1 a low number of potential transit riders in proximity to the Proposed Route; and

12.3.2.2 a lack of transit-accessible destinations for riders to fulfill their employment, recreational, or retail needs along the route.

Accordingly, residents of the Proposed Development or those living along the Proposed Route who are not bound for Uptown Oakville or Oakville GO Station will not find using transit a competitive travel mode.

12.4 The Proposed Development has low potential to ever become fully transit- supportive and enable the provision of competitive transit service. The Proposed Development does not optimize the investment in transit infrastructure because:

H364638-02-230-0002, Rev. A Page 7

12.4.1 There are no plans to increase the density or to change the mix of uses along the Proposed Route;

12.4.2 The route has not been proposed or identified for higher order transit investment by the province, the region or the Town; and

12.4.3 The lack of employment land uses and the prevalence of low-density residential neighbourhoods around the Proposed Development mean that demand on the Proposed Route will be heavily directional rather than balanced.

12.5 In addition to the economic and public health issues caused by increased vehicular traffic and congestion, the Proposed Development will require continual subsidy in poorly-performing, low-frequency transit routes in low-density areas. Given the limited benefit, the funding that would be required to subsidize more frequent service to the Proposed Development would be more effectively spent on the infrastructure required to support planned transit supportive development.

Traffic Analysis

12.6 The traffic analysis of the Transportation Considerations Report prepared by BA Group (the “TCR”) is premised upon multiple methodologies that are unsubstantiated in the narrative of the TCR. These methodologies include the construction and calibration of the mesoscopic model upon which the traffic impact analysis is premised, the identification of cut-through traffic volumes in the vehicle assignments produced by the mesoscopic modelling process, the methodology and interpretation of the queuing analysis, and the selection of scenarios analyzed under future conditions. Based on these unsubstantiated methodologies, the validity of the TCR’s assessment of potential transportation impacts resulting from the Proposed Development cannot be confirmed.

Parking Analysis

12.7 The deviation from the Town Parking By-Law for the townhouse parking requirements has not been sufficiently justified. A shared parking strategy or street parking strategy has not been identified. It is unclear if sufficient parking would be available to serve all residents and visitors to the site.

H364638-02-230-0002, Rev. A Page 8

E. TRANSIT

13. What is Transit-Supportive Development?

13.1 Planning policy in the Province, the Region and the Town centres around transit- supportive intensification at designated nodes that are supported by strategic transit corridors. Transit-supportive planning requires the integration of land-use planning and transit planning decisions. “Transit-supportive” is defined in the Provincial Policy Statement (the “PPS”) as:

“In regard to land use patterns, means development that makes transit viable, optimizes investments in transit infrastructure, and improves the quality of the experience of using transit. It often refers to compact, mixed-use development that has a high level of employment and residential densities, including air rights development, in proximity to transit stations, corridors and associated characteristics within the transportation system. Approaches may be recommended in guidelines developed by the Province or based on municipal approaches that achieve the same objectives” (PPS, Section 6.0)

13.2 The definition sets out the objectives of transit-supportive development. It must make transit viable, optimize investments in transit infrastructure and improve the quality of experience of using transit. It also describes the key characteristics of transit-supportive development, referring to a compact, mixed-use development with high levels of employment and residential development located in proximity to transit stations and corridors. It is acknowledged that there is overlap amongst the characteristics and the objectives; however, the definition in the PPS provides an important and useful framework for assessing transit-supportive development.

14. Objectives of Transit-Supportive Development

14.1 Fundamentally, the goal of transit-supportive development is about maximizing transit ridership by making transit available to more people, and having more people choose transit over the private automobile – in a cost-efficient manner. Maximizing ridership has two components: (i) increasing the potential pool of riders that have convenient access to a transit service; and (ii) increasing the proportion of those potential riders that will choose to take transit over other modes of travel (i.e., increasing the transit mode share). As noted above, the PPS refers to development that improves the quality of experience of using transit, makes transit viable, and optimizes investments in transit infrastructure. These objectives are reviewed below.

H364638-02-230-0002, Rev. A Page 9

14.1.1 Improving the Quality of the Experience of the Transit User

This is sometimes referred to as “transit competitiveness.” Improvement in transit service (routes and stop location, physical amenities, customer service, frequency of service, fare structure, transit priority, and transfer opportunities/interconnection with other services) increases the competitiveness of transit relative to other competing travel choices, including the private automobile. Service that is competitive will also be referred to as “high-quality transit service.”

14.1.2 Making Transit Viable

This refers to the viability of transit as a transportation mode choice, and the operational viability for the transit agency. The former is previously addressed in the discussion of transit competitiveness, thus for the purposes of this witness statement, viability will refer to operational viability for the transit agency.

Operational viability of a transit system can refer to improving the ability of a transit system to meet the travel needs of as many potential transit users as possible, while minimizing cost. Improving operational viability can entail rearrangement of or investment in the existing routes, strengthening existing markets, or introducing new routes and technologies with the goal of improving the overall system performance.

14.1.3 Optimizing Investment in Transit Infrastructure

The transit network can be optimized when the areas of greatest population and employment density are in physical alignment with the highest transit service. The ideal in optimization would be to have new passengers attracted to existing transit routes. It also focuses on planning new transit service where it can attract higher levels of transit ridership and a higher transit mode share.

15. Development Characteristics that are Transit-Supportive

As noted above, the PPS definition of “transit supportive” offers guidance on the characteristics of development that can achieve the objectives. It should be “compact” and have a mix of land uses and high level of density and be located “in proximity to transit stations, corridors and associated

H364638-02-230-0002, Rev. A Page 10

characteristics within the transportation system” (PPS, Section 6.0). Each of the characteristics of transit supportive development must be present in order to fully achieve the objectives. Each of these characteristics is discussed below:

15.1 Transit Supportive Site Characteristics:

A transit-supportive development must be structured to support transit ridership by providing densities that generate potential riders. In addition, there are site design characteristics which can facilitate transit trips such as distribution of transit stops that make accessibility easier. The densities at a site must be arranged in a way that potential riders can effectively and efficiently access a transit service.

15.2 Complementary Land Uses and Densities in Proximity to the Site and Along the Proposed Transit Route:

As noted in the PPS definition: “mixed-use development that has a high level of employment and residential densities” (PPS, Section 6.0) is a key characteristic of transit-supportive development. While each site in the vicinity and along a transit route may not have both high employment and residential densities, the lands in the vicinity and along the transit corridor must together have higher levels of employment and residential density in order to be transit supportive. High levels of density and a mix of uses together allow a balancing of directional transit demand. While residential land uses would generate outbound riders in the morning, employment land uses would generate inbound riders. This is a more efficient way of delivering transit because it reduces wasted residual capacity in any given operating direction, and therefore optimizes transit infrastructure. In addition, a mix of uses provides a mix of attractive destinations along the route, which in turn attracts more riders. It improves the quality of riders’ experience of transit and increases ridership, leading to efficiency and optimization.

15.3 Located in Proximity to Transit Stations and Corridors:

Transit-supportive development must be located in proximity to existing or planned transit infrastructure. Locating the higher density mix of uses in proximity to transit stations and transit corridors along which frequent service can be provided allows for the delivery of high-quality transit that is competitive with other travel modes. Higher-frequency transit services are structured to operate in areas having

H364638-02-230-0002, Rev. A Page 11

greatest density and potential ridership to maximize ridership, minimize operating costs, and maximize returns on investment.

16. The Characteristics of Transit Supportive Development Support the Objectives

16.1 As is evident in Sections 4 and 5 above, there is a clear connection between characteristics of transit-supportive development and the achievement of the transit-supportive objectives. A network of compact, higher-density mixed-used land uses along corridors and at nodes will generate more potential riders in proximity to transit compared to low densities. It also provides trip attractions that can be linked by conveniently accessible transit, increasing transit competitiveness and attracting a greater share of the potential riders. Furthermore, it allows for a better balancing of peak hour trips.

16.2 Development, which has the required characteristics of transit-supportive development, supports the provision of high-quality transit and optimizes transit infrastructure. The converse is also true. Providing high-quality transit, which optimizes transit infrastructure, is challenging when a development lacks these qualities. The provision of basic transit is much less competitive with other modes of travel, is cost inefficient and fails to achieve the transit supportive objectives. This tends to redirect resources from the transit priority areas that are capable of attracting riders and providing high-quality transit service on an optimized basis. The Ontario Transit Supportive Guidelines (the “TSG”) acknowledge this: “The decision to provide service to new communities and areas where ridership may be low must be weighed against the cost of providing transit service” (TSG 1.2.4).

17. Transit Supportive Development Planning

17.1 The TSG notes that transit-supportiveness should be a paramount priority when planning new communities. It advises that municipalities should:

“Plan for a transit service as a necessary utility to support land use similar to water, electricity, and roadways.” (TSG 1.1.3)

17.2 In order to achieve “development that makes transit viable, optimizes investments in transit infrastructure, and improves the quality of the experience of using transit” (PPS, Section 6.0) municipalities through their land use planning decisions, guided by provincial plans, must identify areas where concentrations of “a high level of employment and residential density” (PPS, Section 6.0) can be accommodated

H364638-02-230-0002, Rev. A Page 12

and served by existing or planned transit infrastructure. These areas become the priority areas for transit infrastructure funding.

17.3 These identified areas are important components of the urban structure of a municipality. Directing development to such areas is required in order support and grow viable, high-quality transit in a cost efficient manner.

17.4 The TSG provides that an urban structure supportive of transit will be comprised of key nodes and corridors to facilitate the provision of a more transit-efficient network (TSG 1.1.1). Nodes are clusters of mixed-use development that can generate and attract trips of all purposes. Focusing growth in nodes enables the efficient provision of transit service to as many potential riders as possible.

17.4.1 Nodes must be supported by strategic corridors of transit service to ensure that population and transit services grow hand-in-hand. The use of long- distance, circuitous feeder routes is discouraged in favour of direct links between nodes and transit priority corridors. Lower-frequency feeder routes can directly link smaller nodes with higher-order transit corridors and express routes, whereas larger nodes should be serviced by more frequent transit service to capitalize on the supportive land use patterns (TSG 1.2.2).

17.4.2 In the Town of Oakville, key nodes include Midtown Oakville, the Uptown Core, Kerr Village, Palermo Village, Bronte Village, and Downtown Oakville. The Bronte Major Transit Station Area is also being identified as a future node through an Official Plan Amendment 27. These nodes will be connected through corridors including on Trafalgar Road, Dundas Street, the Lakeshore West GO corridor, and Bronte Road.

17.5 The coordination of land use and transit planning is paramount in the sustainable planning paradigm. The TSG states that “When transit and land use decisions are made in isolation, it can result in patterns of development that are difficult and inefficient to serve by transit” (TSG 1.1.7). This can limit residents’ and workers’ modal choice equity, compromise the operational viability of a transit system, and divert strategic transit investment from the key nodes and corridors of a municipality.

H364638-02-230-0002, Rev. A Page 13

17.6 The TSG highlights the importance of transportation master plans as a tool to strengthen the integration between land use planning and transit. “A transportation master plan outlines policies and establishes a framework of projects and programs to meet the transportation needs of a municipality. As documents that establish the strategic priorities for investment in a municipality’s transportation system, they can have a significant impact on transportation patterns within a community and be used to strengthen the integration of land use and transportation policy” (TSG, Chapter 4, p. 156).

17.7 The TSG notes that transportation master plans “should help to shift modal split in favour of walking, cycling and transit use” through a number of means including:

17.7.1 “emphasizing the integration of land use and transportation decisions and directing transit investments to support planned areas of higher density and mixed-use development; [and]

17.7.2 “identifying and prioritizing strategic transit initiatives and capital improvements needed to enhance transit service and promote a shift towards higher levels of transit usage” (TSG, Chapter 4, p. 156).

17.8 The Town’s Transportation Master Plan Review (the “Oakville 2018 TMP”) includes an assessment of the existing transportation system within the Town and identifies the Town’s transportation needs for anticipated growth to 2031. The Oakville 2018 TMP notes that:

“strategies identified in the TMP Review align with the objectives defined by the Livable Oakville Plan (Town’s Official Plan) and other relevant policies identified by the town, Halton Region, and the Province. Oakville’s future prosperity and success are largely dependent on the effectiveness of multi-modal travel within the town and the establishment of an interconnected system of mobility within the Greater Toronto and Hamilton Area (GTHA). The Transportation Master Plan Review will assist the town to better plan for population growth, increasing traffic demands, and changing demographics and societal values. The TMP Review will also guide initiatives to support more sustainable modes of travel” (Oakville 2018 TMP, Section 1.1).

17.9 The development of the Oakville 2018 TMP included public consultation and the involvement of a Stakeholder Advisory Committee whose membership included representatives of the Town, Halton Hills, Halton Region, Halton Region (Health), Halton District School Board and the Ministry of Transportation of Ontario.

H364638-02-230-0002, Rev. A Page 14

17.10 Both the TSG and the Oakville 2018 TMP offer guidance on strategies to achieve transit-supportive development.

18. The Proposed Development Lacks Key Transit-Supportive Characteristics

18.1 Transit Supportive Site Characteristics:

18.1.1 The Proposed Development has a high residential density and some employment uses (although not a concentration of employment uses sufficient to attract substantial transit ridership). A collector road traversing the community that provides a potential route for bus service is also proposed, which could provide residents and employees with convenient access to bus stops.

18.1.2 While the development offers a potential pool of riders, as set out below, there is little reason for those potential riders to choose transit over their cars where this choice exists.

18.2 Complementary Land Uses and Densities in Proximity to the Site and Along the Proposed Transit Route:

18.2.1 The development around the site and along the Proposed Route is characterized by mature, low density residential neighbourhoods, without: (i) sufficient density to contribute additional potential ridership and (ii) complementary uses that will attract increased ridership. Substantial changes in use and/or increases in density in the vicinity or along the proposed bus route are not currently planned. This means that there will be limited opportunity to grow ridership or otherwise optimize the transit infrastructure.

18.2.2 Proximity to Transit Stations and Corridors:

The Proposed Development is not located in proximity to a Transit Station or a Corridor. It is not located proximate to current or planned high quality transit service. Furthermore, it would not be feasible to serve the Proposed Development with the high-quality bus service characteristic of transit supportive development because of the character of the lands in the vicinity and along the bus route and the distance between the site and any Transit Stations or Corridors.

H364638-02-230-0002, Rev. A Page 15

19. Transit Context of the Proposed Development

19.1 The Town is served by the local transit authority, Oakville Transit, and the regional GO Transit. Oakville Transit provides service within the town and across its borders, while GO Transit is an inter-regional commuter based transit provider for the GTHA.

19.2 The Oakville 2018 TMP states that:

“currently Oakville Transit provides local bus services on 23 regularly-scheduled routes, with seven additional routes serving secondary schools, and three serving senior residences in the town (as of September 2017). The number of regularly scheduled routes has decreased from the 27 routes operated in 2011. This is an effort to reallocate funding and resources to high-demand routes by eliminating low-ridership ones, as part of Phase 1 of a five-year Service Plan intended to improve rider experience for existing customers while attracting new riders. As a result, more frequent services and better connections, along with new bus routes serving growth areas were introduced. The average operating frequency for most routes is 15-30 minutes during the weekday peak periods, an improvement from the 20-30 minutes observed in 2011. Off-peak and weekend services remain at a frequency of 20-60 minutes” (Oakville 2018 TMP, Section 1.1).

19.3 It is noted that the Town had reduced the number of regularly scheduled routes “in an effort to reallocate funding and resources to high-demand routes by eliminating low-ridership ones” citing the objective of improving the customer experience and attracting new riders. These are both objectives of transit supportive development and are illustrations of enhancing viability across the transit system and optimizing transit investment.

19.4 The Proposed Development is located on land currently occupied by the Glen Abbey Golf Club, to the south of Upper Middle Road, and to the east of Dorval Drive. The site is within the urban built-up area, and part of the Glen Abbey neighbourhood which is generally bounded by Sixteen Mile Creek to the west, Upper Middle Road to the north, Fourteen Mile Creek to the east, and the employment/commercial area along the QEW to the south. The site is serviced primarily by low-frequency neighbourhood transit routes, including Route 6 Upper Middle Road, Route 13 Westoak Trails, and Route 28 Glen Abbey North.

19.5 Figure 1 illustrates the transit routes in the vicinity of the Proposed Development. The Proposed Development is not located on an existing node or priority transit corridor identified in the provincial, regional or Town plans and policies. Through the integrated provincial, regional, and Town planning process, no plans have

H364638-02-230-0002, Rev. A Page 16

been identified to designate any arterials or neighbourhoods in the vicinity of the Proposed Development as future nodes or transit corridors.

Figure 1: Routes near the Proposed Development

Upper Middle Road West

Proposed Development

19.6 The following key transit corridors have been identified by the Province in Metrolinx’s 2041 Regional Transportation Plan for the future provision of high

H364638-02-230-0002, Rev. A Page 17

quality, high-frequency regional rail service, light rapid transit (LRT) and bus rapid transit (BRT), including (Metrolinx, 2018):

19.6.1 15-minute service on the Lakeshore West GO corridor between Union Station and Aldershot GO Station

19.6.2 BRT on Dundas Street between Kipling Station and Bronte Road

19.6.3 Priority Bus on Dundas Street between Bronte Road and Brant Street

19.6.4 Trafalgar BRT/LRT between Oakville GO Station and Highway 407

19.6.5 Priority Bus Service on Bronte Road/Regional Road 25 between Bronte GO Station and Steeles Avenue

19.6.6 Priority Bus Service on Trafalgar Road between Highway 407 and Milton GO Station

19.7 None of these future transit infrastructure improvements is proximate to the Proposed Development.

20. The Proposed Route

20.1 The TCR identified the future trip generation at the Proposed Development for the purpose of identifying a new transit route to service the site. The route selected by BA (the Proposed Route) would operate with thirty-minute headways and connect the Proposed Development with Uptown Oakville and Midtown Oakville via Sixth

H364638-02-230-0002, Rev. A Page 18

Line, Neyagawa Boulevard, and Dorval Drive. The Proposed Route is reproduced from Figure 47 of the TCR below.

Figure 2: Proposed Route Alignment

H364638-02-230-0002, Rev. A Page 19

20.2 The Proposed Route is circuitous and will operate primarily through low-density residential neighbourhoods, as shown in the below figure.

Figure 3: Proposed Route alignment overlaid on satellite imagery

H364638-02-230-0002, Rev. A Page 20

20.3 The Proposed Route also overlaps with multiple existing routes, which potentially limits its ability to increase net transit system ridership from outside the Proposed Development.

Figure 4: Proposed Route (yellow) and existing town transit routes.

20.4 The technical analysis that led to the recommendation of the Proposed Route and frequency of service was based on incorrect and outdated assumptions regarding the generation of transit trips at the site.

Transit Mode Share

20.5 One of the key objectives of transit supportive development is to increase the proportion of potential transit riders who choose transit over other modes of travel. This is called increasing the "transit mode share”. For the purpose of transit

H364638-02-230-0002, Rev. A Page 21

infrastructure planning, applying a transit mode share higher than the existing mode share can be appropriate. A higher than current transit mode share should take into account future changes in land use and future planned transit infrastructure improvements. The transit mode share selected by BA in the TCR is discussed below.

20.6 BA developed two “scenarios” for its transportation analysis: “Basic” and “Enhanced”.

20.6.1 The Basic scenario is described by BA as the reflecting “the existing travel mode share by land use” and is applied in the vehicle traffic operations assessment.

20.6.2 The Enhanced scenario is described by BA as being based on “Scenario E” as set out in the Oakville 2018 TMP Review, 2018 with customized adjustments by BA. The Enhanced scenario is used in BA’s transit analysis.

20.7 The resulting adjusted transit mode share used in the TCR is 20%, which BA states “reflects the highest transit mode share potential based on the Town’s forecast.” This compares to the Scenario E transit mode share of 16% and the Town’s target Town-wide transit mode share of 12% established through the Oakville 2018 TMP.

20.8 Based on this “highest transit mode share potential” BA recommends that the service frequency on the Proposed Route should be two buses per hour in the peak hour which is comparable to that of existing basic neighbourhood transit service.

20.9 A transit mode share of 20% is not appropriate for transit service planning or for evaluation of the transit supportive characteristics of the Proposed Development. Ultimately, use of a 20% transit mode share in the analysis potentially inflates the peak hour ridership generated by the Proposed Development, and consequently may overestimate the farebox revenue and economic viability of the Proposed Route. Accordingly, it would not be considered a “conservative” assumption.

20.10 Scenario D, which the TMP identified as the preferred scenario, is a moderate scenario targeting high growth in regional transit ridership, and moderate growth in local transit, for a total transit mode share of 12%. Scenario D entails the future

H364638-02-230-0002, Rev. A Page 22

implementation of dedicated transit lanes on key rapid transit corridors, high- occupancy lanes on other primary corridors, and the extension of the Highway 403 Transitway from Mississauga to Oakville.

20.11 BA states that it used Scenario E in the Oakville 2018 TMP as the basis for its calculations to derive a 20% transit mode share. Based on the review conducted in the Oakville 2018 TMP, Scenario E was not selected as the preferred scenario. Scenario E had the lowest rating in terms of feasibility with a “low potential to attain significant AT/TDM [active transportation/transportation demand management]”, and required a “very significant increase in Local Transit and Regional Transit”. The scenario was first identified in the Town’s 2013 Transportation Master Plan as the “High Growth Transit Scenario,” and required the following network improvements: the introduction of high-quality rapid transit service with five-minute headways on key corridors, in addition to all measures required to achieve Scenario D. The Oakville 2018 TMP acknowledges that Scenario E is not currently a realistic goal for the Town.

20.12 BA’s transit mode share of 20% is 25% higher than Scenario E, on which it is based, and more than 50% greater than the preferred Scenario D transit mode share. It is important to adhere to the most current mode share target set forth in the Oakville 2018 TMP to determine the most reasonable levels of transit service and infrastructure investment in the Town. The mode share target of 12% was developed through a review of the transportation system, future planned transit investments and needs on a Town-wide basis and involved consultation with key transportation and planning stakeholders.

20.13 The methodology used by BA to adjust the Scenario E transit mode share upward by 25% involves a number of flawed assumptions.

20.13.1 Local vs. GO Transit Mode Shares

20.13.1.1 The existing local and GO transit mode share associated with residential land uses is reported in the TCR as 2-4% and 7- 10%, respectively. In the Enhanced scenario, BA forecasts these to increase to 7-9% and 12-14%, respectively. The local transit mode share doubles, but the GO transit mode share increases by less than half between existing and forecasted conditions.

H364638-02-230-0002, Rev. A Page 23

20.13.1.2 It is unclear why local transit trips would experience such disproportional growth relative to the GO transit trips. Implementation of the Metrolinx GO Expansion program on the Lakeshore West line would be expected to drive ridership through the provision of frequent all-day, two-way service. Furthermore, the Oakville 2018 TMP review indicates that its 12% transit mode share target for 2031 (Scenario D) would include 3% local transit trips and 9% regional transit trips.

20.13.2 The Retail and Office Transit Trips as a Proportion of Total Transit Trips

20.13.2.1 The Enhanced scenario represents approximately a tenfold increase in the number of retail-generated transit trips and a fourfold increase for the number of office-generated trips relative to existing conditions in the area, which is unrealistic. Overestimating the office and retail trips in this manner potentially overestimates the level of transit service required to serve this site and may alter the balancing of peak and off-peak direction trips.

21. Revised Technical Analysis

21.1 The 2021 TCR transit analysis can be revised based on updated information from the Town to formulate a more reasonable estimate of transit ridership generated by the Proposed Development.

21.2 A more appropriate transit mode share to estimate transit ridership generated by the Proposed Development is in the order of 10%.

21.3 The Town of Oakville Transit Development Charges Technical Appendix, by Dillon Consulting, February 2018 supplemental to the Oakville 2018 TMP (the “DC Study”) acknowledges that the target transit mode share will not be uniform across the Town. The highest transit mode shares in the Town of Oakville will be achieved in North Oakville, a developing area of the Town that will accommodate 35,000 employees and 55,000 residents by 2031. Table 1 summarizes the 2031 target mode shares in different parts of the Town of Oakville (DC Study, p.82). North

H364638-02-230-0002, Rev. A Page 24

Oakville is forecasted to have a transit mode share approximately 40% higher than that for the rest of the Town.

Table 1: Updated 2031 target mode shares in the Town of Oakville

Mode Share for Transit Trips Beginning or Ending in... 2031 Transit Mode Share South Oakville 9.5% East Oakville 10.8% West Oakville 10.9% North Oakville 14.6% Average of South, East, and West Oakville 10.4% Note. Data in table from Addendum No. 1 to: Town of Oakville Development Charge Background Study, by Watson & Associates Economists Ltd., 2018, p. 82.

21.4 Based on Table 1, the Proposed Development would have an approximate all-day transit mode share of 10%, rather than 20% as assumed by the BA Group TCR. The existing transit mode share in the vicinity of the Proposed Development is approximately 7%. The shift from a 7% to a 10% transit mode share is considered reasonable for this area. Correspondingly, the peak hour transit mode shares assumed in the BA Group TCR are approximately twice as high as the forecasted values according to the Town’s updated 2031 target transit mode shares contained in the DC Study and set out in Table 1 above.

21.5 Table 2 below summarizes the current A.M. and P.M. peak hour mode shares for local transit and GO transit trips, as set out in Table 9 and 11 of the TCR.

Table 2: Current Transit mode shares, as presented in the TCR. Time Period Mode Residential Office Retail A.M. Peak Hour Local Transit 2% 3% 0% GO Transit 10% 1% 0% P.M. Peak Hour Local Transit 4% 4% 3% GO Transit 7% 1% 0% All day All Transit 7% 4% 2%

21.5.1 The current transit mode share for Town of Oakville residents is 7% (Oakville 2018 TMP). This is forecasted to increase to 10.4% across the Town by 2031 (other than in North Oakville) as per the DC Study. An increase from 7% to 10% translates to an increase in the transit mode share of approximately 40%. Applying a 40% increase to the current transit mode shares in Table 2 yields the following transit mode shares in Table 3.

H364638-02-230-0002, Rev. A Page 25

Table 3: Future transit mode shares at the Proposed Development. Time Period Mode Residential Office Retail A.M. Peak Hour Local Transit 3% 4% 0% GO Transit 14% 1% 0% P.M. Peak Hour Local Transit 6% 6% 4% GO Transit 10% 1% 0% All day All Transit 10% 6% 3%

21.5.2 This is in contrast to the following forecasted mode shares in the TCR’s Enhanced scenario which was used to undertake analysis for the Proposed Route, as summarized in Table 11 of the TCR:

Table 4: Future transit mode shares at the Proposed Development, as presented in TCR. Time Period Mode Residential Office Retail A.M. Peak Hour Local Transit 7% 14% 28% GO Transit 14% 3% 0% P.M. Peak Hour Local Transit 9% 18% 33% GO Transit 12% 5% 0% All day All Transit 20% 20% 20%

22. Comparison of Conclusions

22.1 The following presents a comparison of conclusions based on the 20% and 10% transit mode shares.

22.2 Using BA’s forecasted peak hour transit trips (which are set out in the Appendix B of this witness statement) and applying the transit mode shares based on the Oakville 2018 TMP, and the analysis above, results in between 150 and 190 peak hour transit trips (See Table 5). This compares to BA’s forecast of between 280 and 390 peak hour transit trips shown in Table 6 below. The calculations supporting this result are contained in Appendix B of this witness statement.

Table 5: Total transit trips generated by the Proposed Development A.M. Peak Hour P.M. Peak Hour Direction In Out Total In Out Total Northbound 27 19 46 76 30 106 Southbound 9 94 103 35 46 81 Total 36 113 149 111 76 187

H364638-02-230-0002, Rev. A Page 26

Table 6: Total transit trips generated by the Proposed Development, as reported in the TCR A.M. Peak Hour P.M. Peak Hour Direction In Out Total In Out Total Northbound 44 55 94 112 76 188 Southbound 48 101 149 79 67 146 Proposed Route Total 92 156 243 191 143 334 Total for all other directions and routes 0 30 30 25 32 57 Total 92 186 278 216 175 391

22.3 The 150 to 190 transit peak hour trips require the same transit service as BA’s higher forecasted trips: a service with a peak frequency of two buses an hour operating on the Proposed Route.

22.3.1 Town buses typically have a capacity of approximately 70-80 passengers (TCR 8.6.1). Thus, approximately two buses per hour would be required on the Proposed Route to serve the Proposed Development under the updated transit ridership forecast; and

22.3.2 The Town does not typically run bus service at a frequency of fewer than two buses per hour.

22.4 Providing the same service for fewer riders reduces farebox recovery and increases the subsidy required to provide the service.

23. The Proposed Route will not materially increase the transit mode share at the Proposed Development, because the Proposed Development is not transit- supportive.

23.1 The Proposed Route’s primary purpose, as set forth in the BA Group TCR, is to transport residents and workers at the Proposed Development to the key transit nodes of Midtown Oakville and Uptown Oakville. However, transit travel times to these destinations are not competitive with auto trips. In addition, potential riders not destined for Uptown Oakville or Oakville GO Station will benefit little from the proposed service.

23.2 Transit travel times are not competitive with auto trips.

23.2.1 The Proposed Route slightly increase the competitiveness of the transit mode for trips between the Proposed Development, Uptown Oakville and

H364638-02-230-0002, Rev. A Page 27

Oakville GO Station when compared to the existing bus service in the vicinity of the Proposed Development by providing additional service between these destinations. This increase in competitiveness anticipated to be marginal, since auto and transit travel times between the Proposed Development, Uptown Oakville, and Oakville GO station (excluding wait times and transfer times) would be anticipated to remain similar due to the lack of planned dedicated transit infrastructure for the Proposed Route.

23.2.2 The forecasted travel time from the Proposed Development and potential key destinations in the Town is compared for the transit and auto modes in Table 7. A travel time penalty is assigned to walking and waiting at the transit stop for transit travel time, based on anticipated route frequency and routing. Similarly, a travel time penalty is assigned to finding a parking space for vehicle travel time at each potential destination

Table 7: Vehicle and transit travel time estimates from the Proposed Development to Town points of interest Oakville Trafalgar Uptown Midtown Mode Trip Portion Bronte Village Memorial Hospital Oakville Oakville Walking time to transit stop 5 5 5 5 10 10 Waiting time at transit stop 5 5 Local (includes one transfer) (includes one transfer) Transit 25 30 Transit vehicle travel time 15 15 (via Routes 28 and 3) (via Routes 18 and 3) Total 40 45 25 25 Vehicle travel time 15 15 10 10 Auto Time to find parking 5 5 5 5 Vehicle Total 20 20 15 15

23.2.3 Residents of the Proposed Development are anticipated to favour auto vehicle use over transit use. Despite provision of a Proposed Route running through the Proposed Development, the total transit travel time will exceed the total auto vehicle travel time by a minimum of ten minutes in all cases. Lack of dedicated transit infrastructure such as transit lanes, high-occupancy vehicle lanes, and other transit priority measures along the Proposed Route ensures that total transit travel time will exceed total auto vehicle travel time, even if additional buses per hour are added to the Proposed Route. Residents who are able to time their departures according to a given bus schedule will still need to arrive five minutes early to ensure that they do not miss a bus arrival.

H364638-02-230-0002, Rev. A Page 28

23.3 Potential riders not destined for Uptown Oakville or Oakville GO Station will benefit little from the proposed service.

23.3.1 The Proposed Route does not represent a viable strategy to increase transit ridership outside of those two destinations. The Proposed Development is surrounded by an area of low-density residential neighbourhoods that do not offer many transit-accessible destinations for residents of the Proposed Development to fulfill their employment, recreational, or retail needs. Residents of the Proposed Development who are not bound for Uptown Oakville or Oakville GO Station will thus not find using transit a competitive travel mode.

23.3.2 Figure 5 illustrates the A.M. peak hour origins and destinations for Oakville transit users during the A.M. peak hour under existing conditions.

H364638-02-230-0002, Rev. A Page 29

Figure 5: A.M. peak period transit trip origins and destinations within Oakville, as presented in Figure 39 of the TCR

23.3.3 The highlighted regions correspond to areas of high residential density, employment density, or key destinations such as Sheridan College. Few key transit origins and destinations would be serviced by the Proposed

H364638-02-230-0002, Rev. A Page 30

Route. Furthermore, few transit origins and destinations are located in the vicinity of the Proposed Development. This indicates that the Proposed Route will do little to meet the needs of transit users in the Town if they are not originating from or destined for the Proposed Development.

23.3.4 The TCR asserts that it is necessary to provide a high-quality transit connection to the site regardless of the low proportion of land use attractors at the Proposed Development. It states that: “Connecting the site to GO transit services as well as to the wider Oakville area, creates the opportunity to propose new transit services in alignment with existing routes classified as “Major Hub-to-Minor Hub Connections:” [Section 8.2, page 134]

23.3.4.1 Figure 34 of the TCR identifies multiple examples of these “hubs,” including Dundas & Winston Park, Oakville Trafalgar Memorial Hospital, and South Oakville Centre. Each of these points of interest are served by multiple routes. The TCR suggests that the Proposed Development is also a minor hub.

23.3.4.2 However, “hub” is not terminology used by the Town’s OP or Oakville 2018 TMP to identify intensification areas or transit priority corridors. The TCR’s “hubs” appear to indicate locations where multiple transit routes terminate, without consideration of the adjacent land uses. For example, the “minor hub” at the Dundas & Winston Park consists of a layby lane next to a LA Fitness parking lot, and the South Oakville Centre “minor hub” is a lay-by next to a LCBO parking lot. The land uses adjacent to these “minor hubs” render them transit- unsupportive, as is the case for the Proposed Development.

23.3.4.3 Adjacency to transit routes does not constitute transit- supportiveness. Transit-supportiveness is a function of both land use and transit service. The “minor hubs” identified by the TCR are nothing more than the termini of neighbourhood transit routes, and do not have additional land-use or transit planning significance.

H364638-02-230-0002, Rev. A Page 31

23.3.5 The TCR acknowledges that the Proposed Development “will likely not function as a significant transit trip attractor typical of other “transit nodes” in the Town of Oakville (i.e. a terminal point for several transit routes);” however, it nonetheless concludes that connecting the Proposed Development to “various areas within the Town” is merited because of the number of residents (i.e. the density) and the addition of new office and retail uses (TCR, pp. 133-134).

23.3.6 High density on a development site is not the sole determinant of transit- supportive development and does not, in itself, warrant high-quality transit service. Notwithstanding the proposed density which may give rise to a larger number of potential riders, BA concludes that the Proposed Development warrants only basic transit service similar to that provided in the nearby low density neighbourhoods.

23.4 The Proposed Route will not generate additional ridership outside of the Proposed Development.

23.4.1 The Proposed Route will not increase ridership outside the development site because it is circuitous, offering little travel time savings for riders not bound to or from the Proposed Development and does not provide the type of employment, education, retail, and recreational trip attractors that attract transit riders. The TCR’s forecasts for transit ridership on the Proposed Route do not include any transit ridership generated in the neighbourhoods outside the Proposed Development.

23.4.2 No changes to transit infrastructure, routing, or service are currently proposed or confirmed in the vicinity of the Glen Abbey site. It is not anticipated that the population or employment in the catchment area along the Proposed Route will change significantly between existing and future conditions, as the area is comprised largely of mature neighbourhoods.

23.4.3 Lack of dedicated transit infrastructure and intensification potential in the vicinity of the Proposed Development and the Proposed Route limit the potential to provide competitive and frequent service on the route. The competitiveness of transit services to automobile travel along the Proposed Route is thus limited, despite direct connections to Oakville GO Station and Uptown Oakville.

H364638-02-230-0002, Rev. A Page 32

23.4.4 The TCR incorrectly identifies that the Proposed Route will serve underserved areas in the Town, and that it will minimize overlaps and redundancies with existing routes:

“Additionally, Route ‘A’ is oriented along currently underserved areas within the Town of Oakville, particularly along Sixth Line and Dorval Drive. As discussed in Section 8.3.1, future transit routes are planned in order to optimize connectivity while avoiding overlap/redundancies with existing transit routes. The orientation of Route ‘A’ provides the opportunity to potentially access unique transit riders (i.e. beyond those currently accessing existing Oakville Transit services) both within and external to the Glen Abbey Golf Club redevelopment, and likewise provide additional revenues to offset a portion of the cost of operation.” (2021 TCR, p. 155)

23.4.4.1 However, there is in fact significant redundancy between the Proposed Route and existing routes that minimizes the net potential system ridership gain. The Proposed Route overlaps with Route 28 Glen Abbey North on Dorval Drive. The ridership catchment area on Neyagawa Boulevard is already served by Route 19 River Oaks. There would be minimal net gain in system transit ridership outside the Proposed Development resulting from the introduction of the Proposed Route. The TCR’s forecasts for transit ridership on the Proposed Route do not include any transit ridership generated in the neighbourhoods outside the Proposed Development.

23.4.4.2 Buses on both of these routes were running approximately twice an hour prior to COVID-19. Residents in this area are not underserved: both routes operate with substantial residual capacity even during peak hours.

24. Increasing the Frequency of Service is unlikely to improve the transit mode share.

24.1 More frequent service would not increase transit mode share in any material way at the Proposed Development, as the service will primarily provide connections to Uptown Oakville and Oakville GO Station. This encompasses a limited percentage of trips made to the Town. Travelers not bound for these two destinations will not benefit from increased service.

24.2 A high transit mode share cannot be realized at the Proposed Development through transit service improvement alone. Transit services must be supported by

H364638-02-230-0002, Rev. A Page 33

a mixture of land uses at and around the route. Mixed uses, higher density compact development containing a variety of trip generators and attractors supported by active transportation infrastructure linking uses over an area generally within a five to ten minute walk are necessary to attract greater transit ridership and increased active transportation. Additionally, in the absence of improved transit infrastructure which prioritizes transit on the Proposed Route, transit travel time will not be competitive with car travel.

24.3 The Proposed Development would be supported by basic bus service not unlike that provided for the low density residential neighbourhoods surrounding the development. The vast majority of trips made to and from the Proposed Development would be undertaken by private vehicle. The prevailing factors affecting the site thus make it functionally impossible to transform the site into a transit-supportive development. Providing higher frequency transit service will not make the Proposed Development transit-supportive. Given the limited benefit, the funding that would be required to subsidize more frequent service to the Proposed Development, or a similar areas with low potential for higher transit mode shares, would be more effectively spent on the infrastructure required to support planned transit supportive development.

25. Operations of the Proposed Route will not be optimal

25.1 The Proposed Route has not been identified as a focus for transit infrastructure investment in provincial, regional or municipal transit policies or guidance documents.

25.2 Public transit planning and investment decisions must prioritize areas of existing or planned density to optimize return on investment, efficiency of existing transit service, and viability of future transit service. Before consideration is given to developing new infrastructure or services, the use of existing infrastructure and services should be optimized.

25.3 Lands in the vicinity of the Proposed Development and along the Proposed Route are lower density predominantly residential land uses that are not transit- supportive, and are currently served by basic transit service. The area surrounding the development does not have a network of high-quality transit routes to realize the transit mode shares required to sustainably support high-density development, and undermine the ability for the Proposed Development to be serviced by transit.

H364638-02-230-0002, Rev. A Page 34

25.4 The transit infrastructure investment that would be required to provide basic transit service on the Proposed Route could be directed to improvements designed to increase transit ridership among designated higher-density corridors, such as the Trafalgar Corridor. These improvements would maximize service efficiency across the Oakville Transit network. They would also contribute to the Town’s realization of the province’s long-term strategy of focusing transit ridership growth and infrastructure development along key nodes and corridors.

25.5 In addition, the mix of land uses in the Proposed Development and along the Proposed Route leads to heavily directional transit trips particularly during the A.M. peak hour. Based on the revised transit mode share set out in Section 21, in the A.M. peak hour, southbound buses leaving the site would be approximately two- thirds full, whereas northbound buses heading towards the site would be less than 20% full. In the P.M. peak hour, northbound buses heading towards the site would be approximately half-full, whereas southbound buses leaving the site would be about a third full. This is reflective of the lack of transit trip attractors at the site. As a result, it is difficult to achieve balance in ridership which further hampers optimization of transit investment.

25.6 As a comparison, along the Trafalgar Corridor, there are sufficient trip attractors to ensure that buses travelling northbound and southbound are both relatively full in the peak hours. Chief amongst these is Sheridan College, whose students generate many transit trips. Directional demand on the Trafalgar Corridor is thus relatively balanced, ensuring routes on the corridor recoup a greater proportion of their operating costs through the farebox. By contrast, the basic service recommended in the TCR for the Proposed Development requires heavier subsidies to operate.

25.7 Funds that would be used to subsidize the Proposed Route would be better directed to the funding required to optimize the transit system by maximizing transit investment in the nodes and corridors of greatest density in the Town, including along future BRT routes. That infrastructure is important to increase the number of travelers in the Town who will benefit from high-quality transit service and dedicated transit infrastructure, and contribute to the Town’s ability to achieve its mode share milestones set forth in the Oakville 2018 TMP.

H364638-02-230-0002, Rev. A Page 35

26. The Potential Development would generate more transit trips if it were transit supportive.

26.1 The low transit trip generation of the site is indicative of the Proposed Development’s lack of transit-supportiveness. The Proposed Development would be transit-supportive if it were located along one of the Town’s planned higher order (higher frequency) transit routes. However, as indicated by the low mode share at the Proposed Development, many potential transit trips are not being undertaken.

26.2 The transit mode share for North Oakville is identified in the DC Study to be 14.6%. This is approximately 40% higher than the mode share for the rest of the Town, including the environs of the Proposed Development. The mode share for North Oakville is anticipated to be higher than the rest of the Town because it is planned for higher densities along Trafalgar, at Trafalgar and Dundas and along Dundas between nodes. These densities will be in proximity to high quality transit on Dundas Street and along Trafalgar. It is noted that this 14.6% transit mode share is an average forecast for the entirety of North Oakville, and that mode shares across North Oakville will not necessarily be uniform. A development in North Oakville in closer proximity to Dundas Street and/or Trafalgar would be expected to have an even higher transit mode share than 14.6%.

26.3 A query of Transportation Tomorrow Survey indicates that approximately 17% of daily trips occur during the P.M. peak hour, thus approximately 1,100 daily transit trips may be generated from the Proposed Development on a weekday. However, if the same development were located in a transit-supportive location on one of the Town’s future higher order transit corridors such as Uptown Oakville or along Dundas Street, it would have a higher daily transit mode share. If the 14.6% mode share forecast for North Oakville by the DC Study were applied, it would generate approximately 1,500 transit trips per day, corresponding to a difference of 400 trips per day, or 120,000 trips per year.

26.4 These riders generated from a transit-supportive location would be able to benefit from the convenience of the high-quality, high-frequency service on the Trafalgar Corridor and Dundas Street rather than the uncompetitive basic bus service proposed in the TCR for the Proposed Development.

H364638-02-230-0002, Rev. A Page 36

27. Transit Analysis Conclusion

27.1 The Proposed Development is not transit-supportive because it lacks key transit- supportive elements, and will compromise the Town’s strategy to reduce reliance on the automobile as a mode of travel.

27.2 The Proposed Development is not transit-supportive because it lacks key transit- supportive characteristics. The Proposed Development will result in a large, highly car-dependent community.

27.3 The transit service recommended by BA on the Proposed Route entails thirty- minute headways in the peak hour on a circuitous route. This service would be comparable to that of existing basic low density neighbourhood transit services. The Proposed Route will primarily serve as a commuter route between the Proposed Development and the GO stations for the residents and workers at the Proposed Development.

27.4 The characteristics of the Proposed Route make it unlikely to attract new riders along the route or to increase the transit mode share at the Proposed Development over what might be expected in a traditional low density neighbourhood. These characteristics include:

27.4.1 Transit travel times which are not competitive with automobile travel times;

27.4.2 The predominance of low density mature residential neighbourhoods along the route which results in:

27.4.2.1 a low number of potential transit riders in proximity to the Proposed Route; and

27.4.2.2 a lack of transit-accessible destinations for riders to fulfill their employment, recreational, or retail needs along the route;

27.4.3 Accordingly, residents of the Proposed Development or those living along the Proposed Route who are not bound for Uptown Oakville or Oakville GO Station will not find using transit a competitive travel mode.

H364638-02-230-0002, Rev. A Page 37

27.5 The Proposed Development has low potential to ever become fully transit- supportive and enable the provision of competitive transit service. The Proposed Development does not optimize the investment in transit infrastructure because:

27.5.1 There are no plans to increase the density or to change the mix of uses along the Proposed Route;

27.5.2 The route has not been proposed or identified for higher order transit investment by the province, the region or the Town; and

27.5.3 The lack of employment land uses and the prevalence of low-density residential neighbourhoods around the Proposed Development means that demand on the Proposed Route will be heavily directional rather than balanced.

27.6 In addition to the economic and public health issues caused by increased vehicular traffic and congestion, the Proposed Development will require continual subsidy in poorly-performing, low-frequency transit routes in low-density areas. Given the limited benefit, the funding that would be required to subsidize more frequent service to the Proposed Development would be more effectively spent on the infrastructure required to support planned transit supportive development.

F. TRAFFIC ANALYSIS

28. Following a review of the TCR, it has been concluded that insufficient information has been provided in the report to confirm the validity of the traffic impact analysis conducted to identify the potential impacts resulting from the Proposed Development, for the following reasons:

28.1 It appears that BA has constructed its own mesoscopic model to forecast traffic demand in the vicinity of the Proposed Development. Outputs from this mesoscopic model are used to model future traffic conditions and identify the potential traffic impacts resulting from the Proposed Development through microsimulation. However, the documentation of the modelling process is incomplete, including the calibration and validation of the BA model. Therefore, the results of the traffic impact analysis cannot be verified.

28.2 Multiple instances of cut-through traffic are present in the vehicle trip assignment produced by BA’s mesoscopic modelling process. This includes the redistribution

H364638-02-230-0002, Rev. A Page 38

of approximately 200-300 peak hour vehicles from the critical northbound right- turn movement at Dorval Drive and Upper Middle Road East, on Street A in the Proposed Development. Justification for this diversion, including a narrative or a sensitivity analysis, has not been provided, therefore the validity of the traffic volumes used in the analysis of future conditions and the subsequent traffic impact analysis also cannot be verified.

28.3 Furthermore, potential impacts resulting from the presence of cut-through traffic have not been fully addressed in the TCR. Cut-through traffic is discouraged by the Town of Oakville as it can cause safety concerns, decrease quality of life for residents and ultimately result in negative impacts on adjacent neighbourhoods. BA’s assumption to permit cut-through traffic is inconsistent with the proponent’s urban design vision for this road, which includes traffic calming measures detailed in the Urban Design report for the Proposed Development. The TCR does not address the potential operational issues posed by cut-through traffic at the Proposed Development.

28.4 Internal capture trips at this site account for approximately 30% of vehicle trips generated. Internal capture trips refer to trips that begin and end within a proposed site, and thus do not have an impact on the external road network. Examples of internally captured trips would include site residents travelling to employment locations also at the site, site residents running errands at retail locations at the site, and site residents visiting other site residents. The TCR states that the internal capture rate is based on ITE Trip Generation Handbook 10th edition methodology (TCR 4.2.3). However, justification for how and why 30% of trips generated by the Proposed Development do not leave the site is not provided, therefore the validity of the Proposed Development’s trip generation and subsequent traffic impact analysis cannot be verified.

28.5 The TCR includes a queuing analysis for future conditions, which concludes that 95th percentile queues in the vicinity of the site are not anticipated to generate “substantial operational issues” in the transportation network (TCR 6.2.2). However, for numerous movements, the 50th percentile queue also approaches available storage. This indicates that only half of the queue would fit within the available storage and the other half of queue would exceed available storage. The exceedance of storage by a queue would lead to potential operational issues, and necessitate potential infrastructure improvements. However, these potential

H364638-02-230-0002, Rev. A Page 39

queuing issues have not been identified or mitigated in the TCR. Therefore, the validity and necessity of the potential infrastructure improvements proposed in the TCR cannot be confirmed.

28.6 The TCR deviates from the Halton TIS guidelines, which specify that a traffic study for a new development should evaluate the impacts of site-generated traffic, with and without any relevant major transportation system improvements (3.6). The purpose of this procedure is to identify the impacts of a new development on a transportation network before and after any mitigation measures are employed, particularly for critical movements approaching capacity in the network. The TCR does not adequately perform this comparison in its analysis of signalized intersections, because it only analyzes the following conditions: future background conditions without improvements, future background conditions with improvements, and future total (background and development) with improvements. Analysis of future total conditions without improvements is missing. This makes it impossible to identify the movement-by-movement impacts to the transportation network resulting from the Proposed Development, and whether the suggested mitigation measures are required or effective. This approach diverges from that given in the Halton TIS guidelines. Consequently, the validity of the TCR’s process for the identification and mitigation of traffic movements that may be affected by traffic generated by the Proposed Development cannot be confirmed.

29. Traffic Analysis Conclusion

The traffic analysis of the TCR is premised upon multiple methodologies that are unsubstantiated in the narrative. These methodologies include the construction and calibration of BA’s mesoscopic model upon which the traffic impact analysis is premised, the identification of cut-through traffic volumes in the vehicle trip assignment produced by the mesoscopic modelling process, the methodology and interpretation of the queuing analysis, the selection of scenarios analyzed under future conditions. Therefore, the validity of the TCR’s assessment of potential transportation impacts resulting from the Proposed Development cannot be confirmed.

H364638-02-230-0002, Rev. A Page 40

G. PARKING ANALYSIS

30. Parking requirements for the Proposed Development are generally derived from Town of Oakville Zoning By-Law 2014-014, with the exception of the parking rates developed for townhouses.

30.1.1 The parking requirement for townhouses is drawn from the North Oakville Zoning By-Law instead of the main Town Parking By-Law, under the justification that the site vision will be that of a mixed-use development with good transit service (TCR 11.0).

30.1.2 However, the transit trip generation of the site can only support two buses per hour (TCR 8.6.2), which is a level of service in line with the basic neighbourhood routes that serve the low-density residential areas surrounding the site rather than the higher quality transit services planned for planned intensification areas.

30.1.3 Thus, the deviation from the Town Parking By-Law for the townhouse parking requirements has not been sufficiently justified.

30.2 A strategy for the provision of shared parking between commercial and residential uses has not been presented and discussed, including on-street parking. The TCR does not identify any shared parking strategy or street parking strategy for the site. It is thus unclear if sufficient parking would be available to serve all residents and visitors at the site.

31. Parking Analysis Conclusion

The deviation from the Town Parking By-Law for the townhouse parking requirements has not been sufficiently justified. A shared parking strategy or street parking strategy has not been identified. It is unclear if sufficient parking would be available to serve all residents and visitors to the site.

H. OPINION ON ISSUES

32. As discussed above, insufficient documentation has been provided regarding many aspects of the modelling process and the traffic impact analysis, the applicant has

H364638-02-230-0002, Rev. A Page 41

not provided sufficient information and analysis for us to form an opinion on the following issues:

32.1 Issue #28: Whether the development relies on future and uncertain road capacity.

32.2 Issue #29: Whether data collection and analysis related to public right-of-way classifications and cross-sections for roadways and laneways throughout the plan have been sufficient to justify deviation from Town standards and policies, and accommodate the traffic generated by the proposed development.

32.3 Issue #31: Whether the rights-of-way and configuration proposed for the three roundabouts safely accommodate all modes of transportation.

32.4 Issue #32: Whether the proposed location of the intersection of Street A and Upper Middle Road is appropriately separated from the existing Upper Middle Road structure which crosses the Sixteen Mile Creek.

32.5 Issue #33: Whether the driveway access locations and frontage orientations are appropriate, with regards to the densities proposed and the design of the proposed roads.

33. Based on the preceding analysis the following presents an opinion summary on the remaining issues:

33.1 Issue #25: The study area is of a sufficient size and scope to appropriately determine the impacts of the Proposed Development.

33.2 Issue #26: Traffic data collection and analysis has not been sufficient to determine existing, future background, and total future traffic volumes.

33.3 Issue #27: Data collection and analysis of the existing and proposed transportation network has not been sufficient to determine if the total traffic volumes can be accommodated in the selected horizon years.

33.4 Issue #30: Data collection and analysis of the proposed diversion of traffic Street A has not been sufficient to justify the diversion.

33.5 Issue #34: Insufficient justification has been provided to justify the deviation from the parking standards contained in the Town’s zoning by-law.

H364638-02-230-0002, Rev. A Page 42

33.6 Issue #35: Data collection and analyses have not been sufficient to determine the impacts of the proposed development on the Queen Elizabeth Way ramps at Dorval Drive.

H364638-02-230-0002, Rev. A Page 43

APPENDIX A – CURRICULUM VITAE AND ACKNOWLEDGMENTS OF EXPERT DUTY

H364638-02-230-0002, Rev. A Page 44

John Hemingway, P.Eng., PTOE Principal Project Manager

Education MBA, Finance, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, 1989 B.Eng. Civil Engineering, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON, 1974

Professional Affiliations Professional Engineer, ON, 19180017, 1976 Professional Traffic Operations Engineer, Professional Certification Board, ITE, 2002 Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE), 28818, 1996 Illuminating Engineering Society (IES), 693798, 2012

Years in Practice 40+

Experience Summary Mr. Hemingway is a Principal Project Manager with more than 40 years of experience in the planning, designing and delivering transportation infrastructure and services for clients across Canada. John’s areas of specialization include conceptual planning, feasibility studies, traffic operations and safety studies, and traffic management plan development. He is a licensed Professional Engineer and is certified as a Professional Traffic Operations Engineer by the Transportation Professional Certification Board of the Institute of Transportation Engineers.

Selected Experience

Feasibility Studies Eglinton Crosstown LRT Don Mills Surface Stop Feasibility Study, Metrolinx, Toronto ON As part of the Eglington Subway/LRT project, John was lead transportation planner responsible for a feasibility assessment of converting the Don Mills Station on the original subway design concept to a surface stop as part of an LRT design option. This involved consideration of the rationale for the station concept developed as part of the environmental assessment and identification of the advantages and disadvantages of a surface stop, given changes to the anticipated transit services on Don Mills Road and surface transit services serving the stop. The potential to integrate the surface stop with existing and planned surface transit services and planned development in the area of the stop were also considered in the feasibility assessment. New Fixed Link Labrador to Newfoundland Pre-feasibility Study Update, Memorial University NL John was lead traffic engineer responsible for reviewing traffic forecasts for the new link and completing capacity and operational analysis to establish the feasibility of using a single-lane road link to accommodate the projected travel demand using the new link. This included reviewing the design of the tunnel lateral clearances and vertical profile, completing an operational analysis of commercial vehicle, recreational vehicle and automobile traffic using the tunnel to assess the speed profile within the tunnel, given the proposed grades into and out of the tunnel www.hatch.com Hemingway, John | 1

portals. The operational feasibility of the single-lane operation with alternating movement by direction was established in the study, that included assessment of the travel time delay associated with alternating direction movement within the tunnel. Niagara Escarpment Crossing Study, Niagara Region, ON John was project manager for this Master Plan / Class Environmental Assessment Study for a new crossing of the Niagara Escarpment between Hamilton and St. Catharines. The study included determination of the need and justification for a new crossing as well as identification of a preferred corridor and route for the crossing. This was accomplished through development and application of a opportunities and constraints geospatial analysis to identify and assess alternate corridors. Each of these was assessed using generalized evaluation factors for transportation service, socio-economic, natural environmental, land use planning, Constructability and cost. A preferred corridor was identified among the 6 alternatives being examined and a master plan including implementation priorities was prepared and presented to the region. Preliminary Design and Functional Design Studies James Street Bridge Rehabilitation, Thunder Bay for Canadian National Railway, ON Lead Traffic Engineer responsible for the assessment and evaluation of alternatives to permit vehicular traffic on the James Street rail crossing of the Kaministiquia River in Thunder Bay Ontario, for CN Rail. Options studied included rehabilitation to permit 2 vehicular lanes on the outside of the rail line located in the center of the bridge; a single unidirectional vehicular lane in the middle of the bridge that is shared with the rail operation; and construction of a new bridge. Idylwyld Drive & Drive Interchange and Corridor Functional Design Study, Saskatoon, SK Project Manager for a study of alternative interchange configurations and corridor improvement options to improve overall traffic movement and safety. Study included preparation of travel demand forecasts, assessment of alternative interchange configurations including diverging diamond and single point configurations. Operations assessed using micro-simulation (VISSIM) and Synchro/SimTraffic for corridor intersections. Water Street Reconstruction, Robinson Street to Navy Street, Town of Oakville, ON Project Manager for reconstruction of Water Street to full urban standards and replacement of angled parking. Project also included preliminary design of intersection and traffic signal improvements on Navy Street from Rebecca Street to Lakeshore Road. Hwy 417 Widening, Woodroffe Ave to Rest Acres Rd, Ottawa, MTO Eastern Region, ON Project Manager for Preliminary Design Study for widening of Hwy 417 (The Queensway) from four to six traffic lanes. Study also included alignment assessment for extension of the West Transitway in the Queensway corridor. TransCanada Hwy Twinning, Terrace Bay to Schreiber, MTO NW Region, ON Project Manager for Preliminary Design Study for widening of TransCanada Hwy from two lanes to four, including highway realignment of approximately 1 km near Schreiber, ON.

www.hatch.com Hemingway, John | 2

QEW – Dixie Road Interchange, Mississauga MTO Central Region, ON Project Manager for Preliminary Design Study for replacement of QEW Dixie Road interchange in Mississauga. Highway 61 – Chippewa Road Intersection Preliminary Design Study, Thunder Bay, ON Traffic Engineering Lead for the development and assessment of alternative intersection treatments at the Highway 61 – Chippewa Road intersection. Study included traffic data collection and analysis, human factors and safety review of intersection, preparation of traffic forecasts, assessment of existing and future traffic operational, capacity and safety improvements and identification of a recommended intersection configuration and control. Environmental Assessment Dufferin Street Widening EA, Region of York, Richmond Hill, ON Project Manager for this Class ‘C’ Environmental Assessment of the widening of a 6.5 km section of Dufferin Street from Langstaff Road to Teston Road, the Town of Richmond Hill for York Region. Responsible for the overall management of a multidisciplinary team of specialist consultants from Hatch and a number of sub- consulting planning and engineering firms. Participated in comprehensive public and agency engagement program that included conducting 3 public information centres and meetings with technical review agencies. Elgin Mills Road Widening Class EA, Region of York, Richmond Hill, ON Project Manager for this Class ‘C’ EA study for the widening of Elgin Mills Road West from Bathurst Street to Yonge Street, in Richmond Hill, for York Region. Responsible for overall project management, coordination and management of specialist sub-consultants, overseeing the work of Hatch specialists in traffic, drainage, environment, noise, and road design. Participated in agency and public consultations and preparation of Environmental Study Report. Ajax Downtown Roads Class EA, Town of Ajax, ON Project Manager for this Class ‘C’ EA study examining the requirements for the downtown road network to accommodate traffic demands related to a revitalization of the downtown, including the Ajax Plaza. The study included completing the first 4 phases of the Class MEA planning process and preparation of a preliminary design for a number of the study area roadways. Niagara Escarpment Crossing Study, Niagara Region, ON Project Manager and Senior Transportation Engineer responsible for the identification of a new or improved crossing of the Niagara Escarpment that could accommodate commercial traffic. The study area extended from the west boundary of Niagara Region to the City of St. Catharines. The study was undertaken in accordance with the MEA Class Environmental Assessment process, as a Schedule C undertaking but evolved into a Master Plan study when it became clear that no one alternative fully addressed the Problem Statement. Detailed Design Studies Kingston Third Crossing, Kingston, ON Lead Transportation Engineer responsible for overseeing validation stage traffic analysis to verify design configuration and operational parameters for the design and construction of a Third Crossing of the Cataraqui River in the City of Kingston. Traffic input was provided for the development of traffic management plans and staging concepts developed by Kiewit, the contractor on this design build project. Project On-going.

www.hatch.com Hemingway, John | 3

Regional Road 13 Geometric and Safety Improvements, Lake Ridge Road to 1.5 km east of Highways 7/12, Region of Durham, ON Project Manager for the detailed design of geometric and drainage improvements to the section of Regional Road 13 from Lake Ridge Road to 1.5 km east of Highways 7/12 in the Region of Durham. This project involved the design of significant changes to the vertical and horizontal alignment of this 2-lane rural roadway to improve sight visibility and overall safety. A 1 km section of Regional Road 13 in the vicinity of Lake Ridge Road was urbanized with concrete curb and gutter and related storm sewer improvements and fill illumination and the incorporation of traffic signals (designed by the Region). The project also included the design of two new box and open bottom structure culverts to replace existing culverts within the project area. Project On-Going. Rt. Hon. Herb Gray Parkway (formerly Windsor-Essex Parkway), Windsor, ON Lead Engineer for the traffic analysis component of this multidisciplinary project. Provided technical input for the development of traffic control plans and a traffic management plan for the staged construction of an approximate 8 km extension of Highway 401 from North Talbot Road in the Town of Tecumseh to the proposed inspection plaza in the Brighton Beach area of the City of Windsor. Work included consultations with Ministry of Transportation and Infrastructure Ontario staff as well as staff from the four affected local municipalities. Hwy 403 Bridge Rehabilitation, York Blvd - Aberdeen Ave, MTO Central Region, ON Traffic Engineering Lead for development of staging and traffic management plan to accommodate rehabilitation of eight bridges over Hwy 403 in Hamilton. Project included traffic impact, staging analysis and detour plan preparation for Rapid Bridge Replacement (RBR) of the Aberdeen Ave overpass of Hwy 403, including closure of the highway during a summer long weekend. This was the first multi-span RBR project undertaken by the MTO. Traffic Management ICE-MLS PATH Project, B9B Developments, Toronto ON Lead Traffic Engineer for the development of a traffic assessment during construction of the ICE Path at York Street and Bremner Boulevard Street in downtown Toronto. Project included preparation of traffic impact assessment of the staged construction of the path, identification of a traffic maintenance plan and input for the design of the traffic control plans for the various construction stages. MTO Highway 61 Bridge Rehabilitation Traffic Management, MTO, Northwestern Region, ON Traffic Engineering Lead for the identification and assessment of alternative detours and traffic management concepts to permit the rehabilitation of three bridges on Highway 61, at the CNR, Rosslyn Road and CPR crossings, in the southern part of the City of Thunder Bay, ON for the Ministry of Transportation, Ontario. Project On-Going. Scarborough Subway Extension: Traffic Management, Toronto Transit Commission, Toronto, ON Traffic Engineering Lead for the development of traffic staging and traffic management plans for the extension of the Scarborough Subway from the Scarborough City Centre to Kennedy Station for the Toronto Transit Commission. Responsible for overseeing the development of complex staging for Emergency Exit Buildings and Power Substations along to the route through mature residential and commercial areas.

www.hatch.com Hemingway, John | 4

Burnhamthorpe Watermain Tunnel Traffic Management Plan, Region of Peel, Mississauga ON Senior Transportation Engineer responsible for the preparation of traffic management and control plans for various stages for the construction of launch and extraction shafts for a 1500mm watermain tunnel running along a 3.7km section of Burnhamthorpe Road through the Square One City Centre area of Mississauga Ontario. The work involved consultation with the Region and City staff on the staging and traffic control requirements for maintaining pedestrian, cyclist, transit and vehicular traffic during the construction stages. Preparation of traffic control plans for related work including relocation and reconstruction of sanitary sewer by micro tunnelling and open cut sections of watermain on other streets in the City Centre area. Coordination provided with other consultants, including staff engaged on design and construction for a proposed LRT line on Hurontario Street running across Burnhamthorpe Road. Project on-going. Alloa Feedermain, Bovaird Drive to Mayfield Road, Peel Region On Traffic Lead responsible for the preparation of traffic management plan for the construction of two watermains on Mississauga Road from south of Bovaird Drive to Mayfield Road. This project was completed in two construction stages that required maintenance of traffic while crossings of major arterial roads and construction on Mississauga Road were completed. Traffic detours and signage were developed, and traffic management plans for various lane closures necessary to complete the work were prepared. Extensive consultations with regional staff and staff from the City of Brampton required for this project. Safety Studies Taunton Road Safety Audit, Durham Region ON Lead Safety Investigator retained to complete a safety audit of three sections of Taunton Road between Brock Road in Pickering, ON and Townline Road North in Oshawa, ON. Roadway Barrier Investigation, Hamilton ON Project Manager for an investigation of the benefits and risks associated with installing traffic barriers within public rights-of-way to protect private property, pedestrians and cyclists from being struck by errant vehicles, for the City of Hamilton. Select Intersection Operation and Safety Reviews, Town of Oakville, ON Lead Traffic Engineer for completion of operational and safety reviews of 7 intersections in the southwest part of the Town of Oakville. Also completed justification and location study for proposed pedestrian crossing of Bronte Road north of Lakeshore Road. Alternative operational and safety improvements identified and assessed, including benefit – cost analyses. Bronte – Wyecroft Road Roundabout Feasibility Study As a follow-on study to the Select Intersection Reviews, the feasibility for a roundabout at this location was completed using the Halton Region guidelines. Comparison with signalized intersection control completed. Area Traffic Management Studies Weston Downs Neighbourhood Traffic Study, Vaughan, ON Project Manager, responsible for the completion of this study that examined the issues of cut-through traffic and traffic speeds in the Weston Downs Neighbourhood bounded by Rutherford Road and Weston Road in the City of Vaughan. Study include extensive consultation with the neighbourhood residents, Region of York and City politicians and technical staff. Speed, volume and vehicle trace surveys conducted and alternatives to reduce or www.hatch.com Hemingway, John | 5

eliminate cut-through traffic and vehicle speeds were evaluated. Draft and final reports prepared and presented to City Council. Traffic Impact Studies 50 Resources Road Traffic Impact Study, Metrolinx, Toronto, ON This project involved preparation of a preliminary traffic study for the development of this site as a maintenance facility for servicing a new fleet of electric trains providing service on the new Airport link from Downtown. The project involved liaison with the City of Toronto, updating traffic data and analysis of traffic operations at a roundabout serving the site access and Resources Road. Analysis of site access and parking requirements also provided. Traffic report provided in support of EA prepared for site development. Eglinton Crosstown Light Rail Transit (ECLRT), Metrolinx, Toronto and Barrie, ON This project involved completion of traffic management plans for lane reductions and closures associated with the construction of tunnel shafts and construction working areas for the section of Eglinton Avenue from Allen Road to east of Yonge Street. The work included working closely with staff from the City of Toronto, the TTC, and other consultants engaged in the project and providing the traffic signal timing and phasing for preparation of amendments to the PH-M-125 legal drawings for temporary changes to the existing traffic signals required for the construction stages.

www.hatch.com Hemingway, John | 6

Mira Vervoorn, P.Eng. Senior Project Manager/Transportation Engineer

Education B.E.Sc., Engineering Science: Civil / Structural, University of Western Ontario, London, ON, 2005

Professional Affiliations Professional Engineer, ON, 100158240, 2012

Years in Practice 16

Experience Summary Mira is the Regional Lead for Transportation Planning and Traffic Engineering at Hatch leading a very talented and skilled multi-disciplinary team with expertise ranging from travel demand forecasting to route optimization to pedestrian flow analysis. She’s a Senior Project Manager and Transportation Engineer with extensive experience in transportation planning, traffic engineering and design. Mira is a licensed Professional Engineer who has undertaken projects involving transportation modelling, corridor assessments and planning, traffic operations assessments, parking operations management, functional and preliminary design, and transportation master plans. She has strong knowledge and experience in infrastructure transit and transportation projects, specifically related to municipal planning and design work, completing a wide range of traffic management studies, transportation impact assessments, route studies, operations analysis, and safety reviews for both private and public sectors including some of the major regional municipalities and cities in the GTHA as well as the Greater Toronto Airport Authority, TTC and Metrolinx. She has extensive experience leading and conducting Public Consultation and Stakeholder Engagements including Public Information Centres and Technical Agency Group Meetings.

Mira’s recent role as the Lead Transportation Engineer on the Metrolinx GO Expansion Program has helped municipalities and Metrolinx identify transportation impacts and mitigation measures of new GO Station design. The key focus has been on multimodal demand assessments that identifies the needs of all users accessing the station, including the increased ride sharing modes such as Uber and Lyft. The study also involved a functional level Reference Concept Design to determine optimal corridor layouts to support the station design.

Selected Experience

Transportation Management Studies/Route Planning

Regional Express Rail (RER), Transportation and Traffic Impact Assessment, Metrolinx, GTA, ON Lead Transportation Engineer – As part of the Transit Project Assessment Process (TPAP), Transportation and Traffic Impact Assessment studies were required to assess the potential effects of the proposed GO Stations along the Barrie Rail Corridor on the surrounding traffic and transportation infrastructure to identify applicable mitigation measures. The studies include a deep understanding of the network surrounding the station, an evaluation of opportunities and constraints to address capacity issues in the network, and the development of

www.hatch.com Vervoorn Mira | 1

implementation strategies and approaches to incorporate a context sensitive design to encourage a multimodal use of the station.

East Harbour Transit Hub, Cadillac Fairview, ON Lead Transportation Advisor – Mira was the lead transportation engineer providing technical advisory services for ridership forecast for the development of the East Harbour site, specifically related to the new transit station that will serve both Metrolinx GO and Ontario Line trains. The project involved a detailed review of proposed developments around the station, taking into account the residential and employment forecasts for maturing neighbourhoods in the vicinity of the East Harbour Transit Hub and planned transit infrastructure in Toronto. Multiple ridership scenarios were developed to conduct a ridership sensitivity analysis based on various fare integration scenarios and emerging Greater Toronto Horseshoe Area (GTHA) traveler behaviour. Station access mode shares were also developed and analyzed to determine how users would access the station, based on a study of station proxy sites

Park Lawn GO Station and Transit Hub, First Capital Reality, ON Lead Transportation Engineer – This developer led project is a complete, mixed-use, transit-oriented community with a focus on creating a true multimodal transit hub. Mira is leading the development and review of the travel demand forecasting and operations analysis of the mobility hub. The study also includes a new context sensitive planning perspectives to incorporate innovative technologies for the transportation systems.

Road Safety Assessment Methodology Study, Trans Canada Trail, ON Project Manager – This high-profile study required Hatch to develop a network screening methodology and approach based on a set of evaluation criteria to identify sections of the trail that posed safety risks to its users. The study includes research of industry standards and practices to develop a risk score based approach to rank priority locations along the trail. The risk scores are composed of probability, exposure and consequence to identify the level of risk for each location.

Barrie Rail Corridor Expansion Project, Metrolinx, ON (2016-2018) Lead Traffic Engineer – As part of the Transit Project Assessment Process, transportation and traffic impact assessments were completed for 19 rail crossing locations along the Barrie GO train line. The traffic impact analysis assessed existing conditions of the crossing, potential effects and mitigation measures for grade separations. One of the primary focus of the study was to assess impacts to motorists and road users during construction, including the development of traffic management plan for each of the 19 crossing locations.

Operational Review of Existing Traffic Calming, City of Vaughan, ON Transportation Engineer – this assignment involved reviewing the City’s current traffic calming policy, procedures and guidelines and comparing with industry standards. As part of the study, post –implementation review of existing traffic calming measures within the City was completed to assess the long-term effectiveness of the measures and identify opportunities for improvement.

Ajax Transportation Demand Management Plan, Town of Ajax, ON Transportation Planner – This study involved the development of a TDM Plan to address travel demand and congestion on municipal roads and recommended alternative solutions for the Town’s transportation problems through TDM strategies. Mira assisted in project delivery including reviewing the TDM Plan and providing coordination on the project.

Emergency Detour Route Plan, Halton Region, ON

www.hatch.com Vervoorn Mira | 2

Project Manager – Responsible in developing an Emergency Detour Route (EDR) Plan that guides road users around blockages and brings them back onto the provincial facility downstream of an incident. Study involved an update and expansion of the existing compliment of signed emergency detour routes and ultimately provided the Region with Traffic Incident Management Plan and GIS mapping files that identified an updated set of emergency detour routes, along with signing requirements at freeway off-ramps, ramp terminals, and along Regional and Area Municipal roads. Sign designs and messages for each location were specified in compliance with the MTO policy.

Memorial University Area Transportation Study, St. John’s, NL Transportation Engineer – This study was to examine the longer term transportation infrastructure needs in and around the University area. Mira’s role included leading the stakeholder and public engagement as well as reviewing and providing input on the transportation analysis.

Highway 7 vivaNext Bus Rapid Transit Expansion, Metrolinx, ON Traffic Lead – Mira was the traffic lead for the Highway 7 vivaNext Bus Rapid Transit Expansion Project Pursuit for Metrolinx. This study required reviewing the needs of all road users and corridor coordination and management. Mira was responsible for the Traffic Management Plan which involved traffic modelling and detailed operations analysis for all stages of construction and post construction.

Transportation Master Plans

Niagara Escarpment Crossing Study, Niagara Region, ON Transportation Engineer – This study examined the existing road network corridors to determine the need and justification for providing an alternative route for a corridor crossing. This study reviewed the previous Class EA completed in 1997 to determine network changes, truck patterns and capacity demand. Mira is assisting the Project Manager on evaluating alternative solutions for improved corridor network, completing screenline analysis for problem definition and providing benefit cost analysis. Town of Hinton Transportation Master Plan, Town of Hinton, AB Transportation Planner – The Town’s TMP involved developing a model to forecast future traffic volumes and patterns. Existing data and future plans of the Town were collected and analyzed. Three future horizon years were assessed and a final TMP report was produced.

Grande Prairie County Transportation Master Plan, County of Grande Prairie, AB Transportation Planner – This project involved creating an Emme model of the County to forecast future traffic volumes. Road network survey was conducted and used for the development of the Emme model.North of Yellowhead Engineering Design Brief, Strathcona County, AB Transportation Planner – This project entailed travel demand forecasting, traffic operations study using Synchro and HCS 2000, long range transportation study, testing road networks and land use scenarios and preparing Traffic Impact Analysis report.

Environmental Assessments/Detailed Design Studies

Dufferin Street Class Environmental Assessment, York Region, ON Deputy PM/Transportation Engineer – This Environmental Assessment identified and evaluated a range of alternative solutions for implementation of transportation improvements identified in York Region’s Master Plan. The study corridor passes through several context sensitive areas including the Oak Ridges Moraine, which has been identified as an environmentally sensitive geological landform protected by provincial plans. The study has

www.hatch.com Vervoorn Mira | 3

reviewed all modes of travel on Dufferin Street corridor to integrate a complete streets approach to the design. The ESR has been reviewed by the agencies and currently out for Public Review.

Elgin Mills Road Class Environmental Assessment, York Region, ON Transportation Engineer – The primary focus of this study was to review the feasibility of widening the roadway from a two/three lane to a four lane facility between Bathurst Street and Yonge Street. One of the key challenges of this study was to determine the road typology that respects the existing road context and responds to future land use conditions, including a context sensitive design approach that considers a complete streets design.

Winston Churchill Boulevard Class Environmental Assessment, Region of Peel, ON Transportation Engineer – This study involves the widening of Winston Churchill Boulevard from Highway 401 to Embleton Road. It examines alternatives for the widening and intersection improvements to address short and long term issues related to planned future growth. The study will review opportunities to optimize the movement of vehicles, transit, movement of goods, pedestrians, and cyclists.

Sixth Line Class Environmental Assessment, Town of Oakville, ON Transportation Engineer – This study was in response to the anticipated development on Sixth Line and surrounding area. Sixth Line was identified as an “Avenue / Transit Corridor” in the approved North Oakville East Secondary Plan. The current and future traffic conditions were examined and the need and justification for improvements on Sixth Line from Dundas Street to Highway 407 was assessed. Key project issues such as traffic capacity and operations, transportation system considerations and safety were analyzed and evaluated.

Water Street Reconstruction, Robinson Street to Navy Street, Town of Oakville, ON Transportation Engineer – This study involved a reconstruction of Water Street to full urban standards and replacement of angled parking. Project also included preliminary design of intersection and traffic signal improvements on Navy Street from Rebecca Street to Lakeshore Road.

Kennedy McCowan Roads Class Environmental Assessment, York Region, ON Transportation Engineer – The purpose of this project was to determine road network improvements for Kennedy and McCowan Roads from Steeles Avenue to 16th Avenue for opportunities for enhancing safety, operations and design. Travel demand management was assessed to maximize capacity of existing roads. Alternative solutions were examined and evaluated and benefit cost analysis was carried out as part of the evaluation criteria.

Dorchester Road Detailed Design, City of Niagara Falls, ON Engineer-in-Training – Scope of work included formulating a proposal for the detail design of complete reconstruction of Dorchester Road, site surveying, drawing preparations, coordinating meetings, traffic analysis, cost estimates and quantity calculations.

Highway 7/8 Preliminary Design, MTO, ON Engineer-in-Training – This study involved an extensive corridor review from West of Fischer-Hallman Road Interchange to East of Courtland Avenue Interchange. Mira was responsible for the preparation of cost estimates, quantity calculations, Public Information Centre (PIC), and presentations.

Corridor Assessment and Planning Studies

Highway 61 Preliminary Design Study, MTO, ON Transportation Engineer – This study reviewed the existing connection of Highway 61 to a local road in the Township of Neebing and the district of Thunder Bay. It involved preparing a Preliminary Design Report to www.hatch.com Vervoorn Mira | 4

identify potential improvements at the Highway 61 and Chippewa Road intersection. Study included a preliminary assessment of nine (9) alternatives based on a list of evaluation criteria that considered suitable measures including Transportation, System Design, Natural, Social, and Economic Environment, Affordability and Constructability.

Highway 7/115 Highway Corridor Assessment Study, MTO, ON Transportation Planner – This project involved developing an understanding of existing and future corridor deficiencies and providing a complete list of improvement alternatives to address those deficiencies for a 25-year planning horizon. The study included a detailed inventory of deficiencies, traffic analysis including collision analysis, Synchro analysis, quantity calculations and cost estimates.

Highway 9 Highway Corridor Assessment Study, MTO, ON Transportation Planner – This project involved a thorough review of the Highway 9 corridor from Highway 10 in Orangeville easterly to Highway 400 to identify existing geometric, operational and safety deficiencies and provide recommendations for future conditions.

Highway 11 Highway Corridor Assessment Study, MTO, ON Transportation Planner – This study reviewed existing corridor conditions for Highway 11 from Barrie to Severn River. Immediate, intermediate and long-term planning horizons were reviewed and alternative solutions were evaluated. Final recommendations were provided for each horizon including cost estimates for all improvements.

Highway 410 Preliminary Design, MTO, ON Engineer-in-Training – This project included detailed traffic analysis using HCS 2000 and Synchro, quantity calculations, development impact study and preparation of Traffic Operations Report.

Facility Planning and Parking Studies

Ontario Power Generation (OPG), Traffic Operations Review, Clarington, ON Traffic Engineer – This study reviewed the existing traffic conditions at the Darlington Nuclear Generating Station site and surrounding road networks to identify the impacts of new parking lots on site and traffic loading for future conditions.

Cooksville GO Station Parking Expansion Feasibility Study, Metrolinx, GTA, ON Transportation Planner – As part of GO Emergent Task Force Transportation Services for Metrolinx, the feasibility of expanding the current parking capacity at Cooksville GO Station located in Mississauga was reviewed. This study examined the existing traffic conditions at the station as well as on-site circulation of kiss and ride vehicles, buses, parking, and pedestrians. Current and future demand of the station was examined and traffic operations analysis was completed. Access layout and parking expansion feasibility was reviewed including a cost analysis for the final improvement alternatives.

Ajax GO Station Parking Expansion Traffic Impact Study and Preliminary Pedestrian Movement Study, Metrolinx, GTA, ON Transportation Planner – This study reviewed the existing traffic conditions at the Ajax GO Station, in particular to the movement of pedestrians throughout the station network. This station was identified as a rapidly growing station with increasing demand. Additional parking expansion and site access operations were reviewed and alternative solutions for a safe and efficient pedestrian movement were evaluated and final recommendations were made.

www.hatch.com Vervoorn Mira | 5

Brampton GO Station Parking Expansion and Access Management Study, Metrolinx, GTA, ON Transportation Planner – As part of Metrolinx’s The Big Move strategy to improve the transportation system throughout the GTHA, Brampton GO station was identified as top transit priorities. This study examined the feasibility of providing an additional 1,000 parking spaces to the already congested station located in the busy Downtown core. Mira was responsible for conducting site visits, preparing for meetings, liaison with client, traffic operations review, evaluation of alternative solutions and completing the final report.

Training/Certification  Transportation Planning Workshop, Ontario Traffic Conference, 2013  Municipal Class Environmental Assessment Course, Municipal Engineers Association, 2010  Transportation Impact Study Workshop, Ontario Traffic Conference, 2009  Emme 3 Analytical Transportation Planning Workshop, 2008  Emme 3 Certification, 2006

Software Skills  Synchro/Trafficware, PTV Suite, Visum, Vissim, Vistro, Viswalk, Emme, ArcGIS, Arcady

www.hatch.com Vervoorn Mira | 6

Nancy Hui, BASc, MASc Transportation Analyst

Education MASc, Transportation Engineering, University of Toronto, Toronto (ON), Canada, 2017 BASc, Civil Engineering, University of Waterloo, Waterloo (ON), Canada, 2015

Years in Practice 4

Experience Summary Nancy has a diverse range of experience in the design and evaluation of transit hubs and other multimodal facilities. Most recently, Nancy has analyzed the potential transportation impacts of proposed projects on users of the automobile, transit, and active transportation modes in feasibility studies, transportation impact studies and environmental assessments. She has experience using AutoCAD, Synchro, and SimTraffic.

Selected Experience Maple GO Station Expansion, Metrolinx, Vaughan, ON Transportation Analyst. Developed traffic management plan for second track at Maple GO Station, including double track across McNaughton Road. Identified operational strategies to minimize construction impacts to transit, automobile, pedestrian, and cyclist travel.

West Trunk Diversion, Region of Peel, Mississauga, ON Transportation Analyst. Completed transportation impact assessment for Environmental Assessment of a large- scale sewer replacement. Identified the optimal construction strategy from a transportation perspective by evaluating the impact of various construction alternatives on transit, automobile, pedestrian, and cyclist travel through the city of Mississauga.

Internal Circulation Study, Hydro Extrusions North America, Toronto, ON Transportation Analyst. Identified potential obstacles to travel at interior and exterior of an aluminium recycling plant, remaining cognizant of existing equipment and site constraints. Identified an emergency access strategy.

East Harbour Transit Hub, First Gulf, Toronto, ON Transportation Analyst. Developed preliminary ridership forecasts for the site to inform the development of a business case for a station at the site, including analysis of the economic costs and benefits of travel time savings, greenhouse gas reductions, and reductions in vehicle travel. Identified potential transfer strategies to facilitate multimodal trips facilitated by the hub.

CN MISC Terminal, Canadian National Railway, Brampton, ON.

Transportation Analyst. Analyzed potential options for the signalization and retrofit of an existing intermodal site access to better facilitate heavy truck travel.

Internal Circulation Study, Arcelormittal, Hamilton, ON www.hatch.com Nancy Hui | 1

Transportation Analyst. Identified potential obstacles to multimodal travel in an industrial plant with multiple equipment and site constraints, and identified strategies to reduce pedestrian-vehicle conflicts, improve sightlines, and streamline circulation.

Aurora GO Station 25% Expansion, Metrolinx, Aurora, ON Transportation Analyst. Undertook transportation impact assessment for station elements associated with a 25% service increase at Aurora GO Station, located on the Barrie GO corridor. Developed ridership forecasts associated with an incremental increase in regional rail service at the station, including consideration of mode shifts associated with evolving station access behaviour. Developed operational strategies to mitigate potential effects to travel in the vicinity of Aurora GO Station. Identified and evaluated opportunities to facilitate multimodal transfers at the station.

Duke Street Closure Traffic Study, Metrolinx, Kitchener, ON Transportation Analyst. Analyzed the transportation impacts of a closure of Duke Street to support the development of the King-Victoria Transit Hub, including increased train speeds on the Kitchener GO corridor. Developed operational strategies to mitigate impacts to vehicle, cyclist, transit, and pedestrian travel in the vicinity of the proposed closure.

Park Lawn GO Station and Transit Hub, First Capital Realty, Toronto, ON Transportation Analyst. Reviewed development and review of the travel demand forecasting and operations analysis of the mobility hub. The study also includes a new context sensitive planning perspectives to incorporate innovative technologies for the transportation systems for the new transit-oriented community oriented around a multimodal transit hub.

Kent Street Traffic Study, Metrolinx, Guelph, ON Transportation Analyst. Compared the potential impacts of the two alternatives to facilitate higher train speeds and improve safety on the Kitchener rail corridor within the City of Guelph. Conducted a quantitative safety assessment of the existing rail crossings within the vicinity of Kent Street in the City of Guelph, including analysis of sightlines and exposure. Assessed the transportation impacts of both operational alternatives, including for automobiles, transit vehicles, pedestrians, and cyclists. Developed mitigation strategies for any identified transportation impacts, including justification of new signals at critical intersections through signal warrant analysis.

Silver Dart Pave and Restoration, Greater Toronto Airport Authority, Mississauga, ON Transportation Analyst. Examined construction staging strategies and associated signal timing plans to minimize traffic impacts during rehabilitation of a four-lane road providing access between Terminal 1 of Pearson International Airport and Highway 427. Utilized Intelligent Transportation Systems technologies to optimize signal timings after rehabilitation was complete.

Dufferin Street Class Environmental Assessment, York Region, Vaughan, ON Transportation Analyst. Assessed current and future traffic performance of transportation facilities along a major commuter corridor and identified alternatives to address future transportation needs. Identified impacts of selected design alternatives on automobile, transit, HOV, bicycle, and pedestrian travel modes.

Regional Express Rail Package 2: New Stations, Metrolinx, Toronto, ON

www.hatch.com Nancy Hui | 2

Transportation Analyst. Conducted Traffic and Transportation Impact Assessments as part of Transit Project Approval Process for new GO Stations. Supported development of the Reference Concept Designs, including identification of optimal multimodal interfacing strategies.

ICE-MLS PATH Tunnel: Block 9B Developments, Toronto, ON Transportation Analyst. Analyzed the potential traffic impacts of road closure during construction of an underground pedestrian tunnel. Identified strategies to mitigate delays from resultant detouring traffic.

Bloor Street Bike Lane Conflict Analysis, City of Toronto, ON Lead Researcher. Performed conflict analysis to identify before-and-after safety effects of the Bloor Street bike lanes. Explored use of machine learning in automatically identifying multimodal conflicts.

Software AutoCAD Synchro Sim Traffic Microsoft Office

Technical Papers Nancy Hui, Matthew Roorda, & Eric J. Miller, Using Video Data to Evaluate Pedestrian, Bicycle and Vehicle Conflicts, Joint ITE/CITE 2017 Annual Meeting and Exhibit , Toronto (ON), Canada, 2017

Nancy Hui, Shoshanna Saxe, Matthew Roorda, Paul Hess & Eric J. Miller, Measuring the completeness of complete streets, Transport Reviews, Toronto (ON), Canada, 2016

Languages English

www.hatch.com Nancy Hui | 3

Local Planning Appeal Tribunal Tribunal d'appel de l'aménagement local

ACKNOWLEDGMENT OF EXPERT’S DUTY

Case Number Municipality PL171084 PL180158 Regional Municipality of Halton, Town of Oakville PL180580 MM180022 MM170004

1. My name is……………………………………………………………John Hemingway I live at the ………………….………………………………………..City of Burlington in the…………………………………………………..Regional Municipality of Halton in the ….....………………………………………………………….Province of Ontario

2. I have been engaged by or on behalf of the Town of Oakville to provide evidence in relation to the above-noted LPAT proceeding.

3. I acknowledge that it is my duty to provide evidence in relation to this proceeding as follows:

a. to provide opinion evidence that is fair, objective and non-partisan;

b. to provide opinion evidence that is related only to matters that are within my area of expertise; and

c. to provide such additional assistance as the LPAT may reasonably require, to determine a matter in issue.

d. not to seek or receive assistance or communication, except technical support, while under cross examination, through any means including any electronic means, from any third party, including but not limited to legal counsel or client.

4. I acknowledge that the duty referred to above prevails over any obligation which I may owe to any party by whom or on whose behalf I am engaged.

Date…May 17, 2021 ……………………………………………….

Signature

Local Planning Appeal Tribunal

Tribunal d'appel de l'aménagement local

ACKNOWLEDGMENT OF EXPERT’S DUTY

Case Number Municipality PL171084 PL180158 Regional Municipality of Halton, Town of Oakville PL180580 MM180022 MM170004

1. My name is…………………………………………………………………Mira Vervoorn I live at the …………………….……………………………………City of Burlington in the……………...….………………………………Regional Municipality of Halton in the ….....…………………………………………………………Province of Ontario

2. I have been engaged by or on behalf of the Town of Oakville to provide evidence in relation to the above-noted LPAT proceeding.

3. I acknowledge that it is my duty to provide evidence in relation to this proceeding as follows:

a. to provide opinion evidence that is fair, objective and non-partisan;

b. to provide opinion evidence that is related only to matters that are within my area of expertise; and

c. to provide such additional assistance as the LPAT may reasonably require, to determine a matter in issue.

4. I acknowledge that the duty referred to above prevails over any obligation which I may owe to any party by whom or on whose behalf I am engaged.

Date………May 16, 2021 ………………………………………………………. Signature

Local Planning Appeal Tribunal

Tribunal d'appel de l'aménagement local

ACKNOWLEDGMENT OF EXPERT’S DUTY

Case Number Municipality PL171084 PL180158 Regional Municipality of Halton, Town of Oakville PL180580 MM180022 MM170004

1. My name is………………………………………………………………………Nancy Hui I live at the …………………….……………………..…………………..City of Guelph in the……………...….……………………………...... ……………..Wellington County in the ….....…………………………………………..………….….Province of Ontario

2. I have been engaged by or on behalf of the Town of Oakville to provide evidence in relation to the above-noted LPAT proceeding.

3. I acknowledge that it is my duty to provide evidence in relation to this proceeding as follows:

a. to provide opinion evidence that is fair, objective and non-partisan;

b. to provide opinion evidence that is related only to matters that are within my area of expertise; and

c. to provide such additional assistance as the LPAT may reasonably require, to determine a matter in issue.

4. I acknowledge that the duty referred to above prevails over any obligation which I may owe to any party by whom or on whose behalf I am engaged.

Date………May 15th, 2021……… ………………….……………………………. Signature

APPENDIX B – BIOGRAPHY

BA Group. (2016). Glen Abbey Golf Club Proposed Redevelopment Transportation Considerations. Retrieved from http://www.glenabbeyplan.com/pdf/Transportation%20Consideration.pdf BA Group. (2021). Glen Abbey Golf Club Proposed Redevelopment Transportation Considerations Update. Government of Ontario. (2020). A Place to Grow: Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe. Retrieved from https://files.ontario.ca/mmah-place-to-grow-office-consolidation-en-2020-08-28.pdf Government of Ontario. (2021). Greater Golden Horseshoe (GGH) transportation plan. Retrieved from https://www.ontario.ca/page/greater-golden-horseshoe-ggh-transportation-plan#section-1 Halton Region. (2015). Transportation Impact Study Guidelines. Retrieved from https://www.halton.ca/Repository/Transportation-Impact-Study-Guidelines Halton Region. (2018). Halton Region Official Plan - Office Consolidation. Retrieved from https://www.halton.ca/Repository/ROP-%E2%80%93-June-19,-2018-Office-Consolidation- %E2%80%93-Text Halton Region. (2020). Halton Region Budget and Business Plan 2020. Retrieved from https://www.halton.ca/Repository/2020-Budget-and-Business-Plan Institute of Transportation Engineers. (2017). Trip Generation Manual. (10, Ed.). Metrolinx. (2018). 2041 Regional Transportation Plan. Retrieved from http://www.metrolinx.com/en/regionalplanning/rtp/Metrolinx%20- %202041%20Regional%20Transportation%20Plan%20%E2%80%93%20Print.pdf Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing. (2016). Building Complete Communities: Supporting Quality of Life. Retrieved from http://www.mah.gov.on.ca/AssetFactory.aspx?did=15007 Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing. (2020). A Place to Grow: Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe (Office Consolidation). Retrieved from https://files.ontario.ca/mmah-place-to-grow- office-consolidation-en-2020-08-28.pdf Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing. (2020). Provincial Policy Statement. Retrieved from https://files.ontario.ca/mmah-provincial-policy-statement-2020-accessible-final-en-2020-02-14.pdf Ministry of Transportation. (2012). Transit Supportive Guidelines. Retrieved from http://www.mto.gov.on.ca/english/transit/pdfs/transit-supportive-guidelines.pdf Oakville Transit. (2020). Doing Business. Retrieved from https://www.oakvilletransit.ca/doing-business.html Oakville Transit. (2020). Oakville Transit Dataset [private correspondence]. Town of Oakville. (2008). North Oakville East Secondary Plan. Retrieved from https://www.oakville.ca/assets/2011%20planning/nco-EastPlan.pdf Town of Oakville. (2010). Transit Strategy . Retrieved from https://www.oakville.ca/assets/2011%20planning/lo-TransPlan-Strategy.pdf Town of Oakville. (2013). Switching Gears: Transportation Master Plan . Retrieved from oakville.ca/assets/general%20-%20town%20hall/SwitchingGears-TMP-Full.pdf Town of Oakville. (2014). Oakville Zoning By-law 2014-014. Retrieved from https://www.oakville.ca/assets/2011%20planning/2014-014-totalpackage.pdf Town of Oakville. (2014). Trafalgar Road Corridor Planning Study. Retrieved from https://www.oakville.ca/assets/2011%20planning/ps-TrafalgarCorridor-Finalreport-Feb2014.pdf Town of Oakville. (2017). Midtown Strategy, 2014. Retrieved from https://www.oakville.ca/townhall/midtown-strategy.html

Town of Oakville. (2018a). Town of Oakville Development Charge Background Study Consolidated Report. Retrieved from https://www.oakville.ca/assets/general%20- %20town%20hall/Oakville%20DC%20Consolidated%20Report.pdf Town of Oakville. (2018b). Transportation Master Plan Review. Retrieved from https://www.oakville.ca/townhall/switching-gears-tmp.html Town of Oakville. (2018c). Livable Oakville Plan. Retrieved from https://www.oakville.ca/townhall/livable- oakville-official-plan.html Town of Oakville. (2019). Livable by Design Manual . Retrieved from https://www.oakville.ca/business/urban-design-direction.html Town of Oakville. (2020). North Oakville Secondary Plans Review. Retrieved from https://www.oakville.ca/planoakville/north-oakville-secondary-plans.html University of Toronto Data Management Group. (2016). Data Retrieval System: 2016 Transportation Tomorrow Survey. Retrieved from http://dmg.utoronto.ca Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. (2018). Addendum No. 1 to: Town of Oakville Development Charge Background Study. Retrieved from https://www.oakville.ca/assets/general%20- %20town%20hall/DC-BackgroundStudy-Addendum1.pdf

APPENDIX C - CALCULATIONS

This appendix summarizes the calculation procedures entailed in revising the TCR transit analysis based on the updated transit mode share forecasts presented in the 2018 Oakville TMP Review.

1. A more appropriate transit mode share for the Proposed Development is in the order of 10%. The DC Study supplemental to the Oakville TMP review acknowledges that the target transit mode share will not be uniform in the town. The highest transit mode shares in the Town of Oakville will be achieved in North Oakville, a developing area in the Town that will accommodate 35,000 employees and 55,000 residents by 2031. Table B 1 summarizes the 2031 target mode shares in different parts of the Town of Oakville (DC Study, p.82). North Oakville is forecasted to have a transit mode share approximately 40% higher than that for the rest of the Town.

Table B 1: Updated 2031 target mode shares in the Town of Oakville Mode Share for Transit Trips Beginning or Ending in... 2031 Transit Mode Share South Oakville 9.5% East Oakville 10.8% West Oakville 10.9% North Oakville 14.6% Average of South, East, and West Oakville 10.4% Note. Data in table from Addendum No. 1 to: Town of Oakville Development Charge Background Study, by Watson & Associates Economists Ltd., 2018, p. 82.

2. Based on Table B 1, the Proposed Development would have an approximate all-day transit mode share of 10%, rather than 20% as assumed by the BA Group TCR (the TCR). The existing transit mode share in the vicinity of the Proposed Development is approximately 7%. The shift from a 7% to a 10% transit mode share is considered reasonable for this area. Correspondingly, the peak hour transit mode shares assumed in the TCR are approximately twice as high as the forecasted values according to the Town’s updated 2031 target transit mode shares contained in the DC Study and set out in Table B 1 above.

3. Table 2 below summarizes the A.M. and P.M. peak hour mode shares for local transit and GO transit trips, as introduced in Table 9 and 11 of the TCR. GO trips are defined in the Transportation Tomorrow Survey (TTS) as all trips with a component on the GO rail system. Local transit trips are those that do not use GO rail for any component of the trip. Local transit and GO transit trips are presented separately to maintain consistency with the TCR and the TTS classifications.

- 2 -

Table B 2: Transit mode shares, as presented in the TCR. Time Period Mode Residential Office Retail A.M. Peak Hour Local Transit 2% 3% 0% GO Transit 10% 1% 0% P.M. Peak Hour Local Transit 4% 4% 3% GO Transit 7% 1% 0% All day All Transit 7% 4% 2%

4. The current transit mode share for Town of Oakville residents is 7%. This is forecasted to increase to 10.4% outside of North Oakville by 2031, as per the DC Study. An increase from 7% to 10% translates to an increase in the transit mode share of approximately 40%. Applying a 40% increase to the above transit mode shares in Table 2 yields the following transit mode shares in Table B 3.

Table B 3: Future transit mode shares at the Proposed Development. Time Period Mode Residential Office Retail A.M. Peak Hour Local Transit 3% 4% 0% GO Transit 14% 1% 0% P.M. Peak Hour Local Transit 6% 6% 4% GO Transit 10% 1% 0% All day All Transit 10% 6% 3%

(a) This is in contrast to the following forecasted mode shares in the TCR’s “enhanced scenario” which was used to undertake analysis for the Proposed Route, as summarized in Table 11 of the TCR.

Table B 4: Future transit mode shares at the Proposed Development, as presented in TCR. Time Period Mode Residential Office Retail A.M. Peak Hour Local Transit 7% 14% 28% GO Transit 14% 3% 0% P.M. Peak Hour Local Transit 9% 18% 33% GO Transit 12% 5% 0% All day All Transit 20% 20% 20%

5. Table 23 of the TCR illustrates the person trips generated by each of the land uses of the Proposed Development. These person trips are summarized in Table B 5 below.

Table B 5: Peak hour person trips generated by the Proposed Development Time Period Direction Residential Office Retail Total Inbound 370 95 95 560 A.M. Peak Hour Outbound 1340 10 50 1400 Total 1710 105 145 1960 Inbound 1090 5 170 1265 P.M. Peak Hour Outbound 665 100 150 915 Total 1755 105 320 2180

6. Cross-multiplying the person trips in Table 5 by the local transit mode shares in Table 3 yields the following local transit trips generated by the Proposed Development in Table B 6.

Table B 6: Local transit only trips generated by the Proposed Development Time Period Direction Residential Office Retail Total A.M. Peak Hour Inbound 10 4 0 14

- 3 -

Outbound 38 0 0 38 Total 48 4 0 52 Inbound 61 0 7 68 P.M. Peak Hour Outbound 37 6 6 49 Total 98 6 13 118

7. Similarly, cross-multiplying the person trips in Table B 5 by the GO transit mode shares in Table 3 yields the following GO transit trips generated by the Proposed Development. A 40% local transit station access mode share factor is applied to identify only the GO Trips that also entail local transit trips, as identified in Table 13 of the TCR.

Table B 7: GO transit trips generated by the Proposed Development that also use local transit Time Period Direction Residential Office Retail Total Inbound 21 1 0 21 A.M. Peak Hour Outbound 75 0 0 75 Total 96 1 0 96 Inbound 43 0 0 43 P.M. Peak Hour Outbound 26 1 0 27 Total 69 1 0 69

8. It is conservatively assumed that all local transit trips will be undertaken using the Proposed Route. The directionality of local transit trips including and excluding transfers to the GO rail system can thus be determined. Table 46 of the TCR identifies the directionality of local transit trips in the TCR, and is reproduced on the left side of Table B 8 below for trips along the Proposed Route only. Trips taken by both local transit and GO transit are assumed to travel between the Proposed Development and Oakville GO Station only.

Table B 8: Transit trip directionality at the Proposed Development Local transit only GO transit trips that also use local transit Time Period Direction Northbound Southbound Northbound Southbound Inbound 38% 62% 100% 0% A.M. Peak Hour Outbound 50% 50% 0% 100% Inbound 49% 51% 100% 0% P.M. Peak Hour Outbound 61% 39% 0% 100%

9. Cross-multiplying Table B 8 by Table B 6 and Table B 7 thus yield the total inbound and outbound transit trips generated by the Proposed Development, presented in Table B 9.

Table B 9: Total transit trips generated by the proposed development A.M. Peak Hour P.M. Peak Hour Direction In Out Total In Out Total Northbound 27 19 46 76 30 106 Southbound 9 94 103 35 46 81 Total 36 113 149 111 76 187

- 4 -

(a) This is in contrast to the number of transit trips that would be generated by the Proposed Development, as reported in Table 49 of the TCR and summarized below.

Table B 10: Total transit trips generated by the proposed development, as reported in the TCR

A.M. Peak Hour P.M. Peak Hour Direction In Out Total In Out Total Northbound 44 55 94 112 76 188 Southbound 48 101 149 79 67 146 Proposed Route Total 92 156 243 191 143 334 Total for all other directions and routes 0 30 30 25 32 57 Total 92 186 278 216 175 391

10. Using this new transit mode share target, it is anticipated that the Proposed Development will generated approximately 150 to 190 local transit peak hour trips.