Open Council

Civic Works Committee

Open Council

Civic Works Committee

December 14, 2021, at 12:00 PM

Original link

1.   Call to Order

1.1   Disclosures of Pecuniary Interest

That it BE NOTED that no pecuniary interests were disclosed.

1.2   Election of Vice-Chair for the term ending November 14, 2022

Moved by M. van Holst

Seconded by P. Van Meerbergen

That Councillor J. Fyfe-Millar BE ELECTED Vice-Chair of the Civic Works Committee for the term ending November 14, 2022.

Motion Passed (5 to 0)

2.   Consent

Moved by J. Helmer

Seconded by J. Fyfe-Millar

That Items 2.1 and 2.3 BE APPROVED.

Motion Passed (6 to 0)

2.1   10th Report of the Transportation Advisory Committee

2021-11-30 TAC Report

Moved by J. Helmer

Seconded by J. Fyfe-Millar

That the 10th Report of the Transportation Advisory Committee, from its meeting held on November 30, 2021, BE RECEIVED.

Motion Passed

2.3   Highbury Avenue South Rehabilitation Project

2021-12-14 SR - Highbury Avenue South Rehabilitation Project

2021-12-14 SR - Highbury Avenue South Rehabilitation Project Appendix A

Moved by J. Helmer

Seconded by J. Fyfe-Millar

That, on the recommendation of the Deputy City Manager, Environment and Infrastructure, the following actions be taken with respect to the staff report dated December 14, 2021, related to the appointment of a Consulting Engineering for the Highbury Avenue South Rehabilitation Project from the Wenige Expressway Bridge to Highway 401:

a)        Parsons Inc. BE APPOINTED Consulting Engineers to update and complete the detailed design, and provide assistance with the tendering for the rehabilitation of Highbury Avenue South (Wenige Expressway Bridge to Highway 401) in the amount of $284,178.00, excluding HST, in accordance with Section 15.2 (g) of the City of London’s Procurement of Goods and Services Policy;

b)        the financing for this appointment BE APPROVED as set out in the Sources of Financing Report as appended to the above-noted staff report;

c)        the Civic Administration BE AUTHORIZED to undertake all the administrative acts that are necessary in connection with this appointment;

d)        the approvals given herein BE CONDITIONAL upon the Corporation entering into a formal contract with the Consultant for the work; and,

e)        the Mayor and the City Clerk BE AUTHORIZED to execute any contract or other documents, including MTO or utility agreements, if required, to give effect to these recommendations. (2021-T08)

Motion Passed

2.2   Supply and Delivery of Transit Signal Priority and Emergency Vehicle Preemption System

2021-12-14 SR - Supply and Delivery of Transit Signal Priority and Emergency Vehicle Preemption System

2021-12-14 SR - Supply and Delivery of Transit Signal Priority and Emergency Vehicle Preemption System - Appendix A

Moved by J. Fyfe-Millar

Seconded by P. Van Meerbergen

That, on the recommendation of the Deputy City Manager, Environment and Infrastructure, the following actions be taken with respect to the staff report dated December 14, 2021, related to RFP21-08 Transit Signal Priority and Emergency Vehicle Preemption System:

a)        Applied Information Inc. BE AWARDED the contract to supply and deliver intersection detection systems in the amount of $1,791,375.50, excluding HST, in accordance with Section 12.2 (b) of the City of London’s Procurement of Goods and Services Policy;

b)        the financing for this project BE APPROVED in accordance with the Sources of Financing Report as appended to the above-noted staff report;

c)        the Civic Administration BE AUTHORIZED to undertake all the administrative acts that are necessary in connection with this project;

d)        the approvals given herein BE CONDITIONAL upon the Corporation entering into a formal contract with the Contractor for the work; and,

e)        the Mayor and the City Clerk BE AUTHORIZED to execute any contract or other documents, if required, to give effect to these recommendations. (2021-P16/F05A)

Motion Passed (6 to 0)

2.4   Unwanted Water: Quantifying Inflow and Infiltration in London’s Wastewater Sewer System

2021-12-14 SR - Unwanted Water Quantifying Inflow and Infiltration in London

Moved by P. Van Meerbergen

Seconded by J. Fyfe-Millar

That, on the recommendation of the Deputy City Manager, Environment and Infrastructure, the staff report dated December 14, 2021, with respect to the impacts of the City’s unwanted water issues BE RECEIVED for information. (2021-E03)

Motion Passed (6 to 0)

3.   Scheduled Items

None.

4.   Items for Direction

4.1   A Conceptual Framework for Regional Transportation in London

2021-12-14 SR - A Conceptual Framework for Regional Transportation in London

Moved by E. Holder

Seconded by J. Fyfe-Millar

That, on the recommendation of the Deputy City Manager, Planning and Economic Development, the following actions be taken with respect to the staff report dated December 14, 2021, related to regional transportation in Southwestern Ontario:

a)        the conceptual framework for regional transportation as presented in the above-noted staff report BE ENDORSED; and,

b)        the Civic Administration BE AUTHORIZED to use the conceptual framework as a basis for discussions with the Province of Ontario and municipalities to advance provincial participation in regional transportation in Southwestern Ontario;

it being noted that the staff presentation and a communication from R. Chambers, SCOR EDC, with respect to this matter, were received. (2021-T10)

Motion Passed (6 to 0)

5.   Deferred Matters/Additional Business

5.1   Deferred Matters List

CWC DEFERRED MATTERS as at December 6, 2021

Moved by J. Fyfe-Millar

Seconded by M. van Holst

That the Civic Works Committee Deferred Matters List as at December 6, 2021, BE RECEIVED.

Motion Passed (6 to 0)

6.   Adjournment

The meeting adjourned at 12:55 PM.

Full Transcript

Transcript provided by Lillian Skinner’s London Council Archive. Note: This is an automated speech-to-text transcript and may contain errors. Speaker names are not identified.

View full transcript (1 hour, 6 minutes)

[0:10] I just started the eScribe stream. Sorry, I had YouTube ready to go. So just give me a second. Sorry, I have both of them running now. This will just take a moment. So if we can just do another sound check here, I’ll see if I can get it on the streaming.

[1:45] Certainly. One check, people too, hear us. I’m not sure what John just said there, but it’s hard for me to tell because I’ve got the zoom going. So hopefully I’ll start letting people in and we’ll get maybe Michael to confirm the stream in just a moment. Perfect, thank you. I’ve got it now.

[2:16] I’ve got it now. It’s caught up. Thanks. Okay, thank you. I think I’ll have a little break.

[9:13] It’s not as much as Jack. I don’t know. This is the screens on for any counselors at home, just so we can validate that you are here with us.

[11:36] This is the first meeting at the Civic Works Committee, meeting virtually during the COVID-19 pandemic. The city of London is committed to making every effort to provide alternate formats and communication supports for council standing advisory committee meetings and information upon request. To make a request for any city service, please contact accessibility@london.ca or 519-661-2489 extension 2425. To make a request specific to this meeting, please contact CWC@london.ca. For those attending virtually, just for you know, I have councilor Fyke Malar with me in chambers and Mayor Holder has not logged in yet, but everyone else is here and we do have quorum.

[12:20] So the meeting is called to order and I will look to committee for disclosures of pecuniary interest. Seeing none, we also have the election of vice chair for the term ending November 14th, 2021, looking to committee to see if there is any interest of people nominating themselves or someone else for the position of vice chair. Mr. Vanholst.

[12:56] Thank you, Madam Chair. I’d be interested in nominating and councilor Fyfe Miller if he’s willing to accept the position. I believe he got a vice chair position yesterday as well, but we will turn over to the councilor to see if he’s interested and if not knowing that he has had an opportunity, if there’s anybody else, I like that we’re making space for each other. So I’ll go to the councilor for his thoughts. I’m happy to put my name forward for that position as vice chair, Madam Chair.

[13:34] So thank you for that. So we have a mover in the nomination of councilor Fyfe Malar and councilor would accept in second. Councilor Van Merbergen, are you seconding that? I certainly will, but I also wanted to just say something quickly. Yes, please. I’m just a little housekeeping here. I noticed in 1.2 on the agenda page, we’ve got till November 14th, 2021. I believe that should be 2022. Sorry, yes, it’s corrected on the added.

[14:09] Thank you. And I just wanted to mention that you verbally stated 2021 as well. So 2022, okay. Thank you for that. Yes, you would already be done that commitment. Thank you. Thank you. Okay, looking to committee seat, there’s any other nominations of oneself or someone else before we would call the question. The committee clerk has noted that it is now prepared in eScribe if you would like to turn your attention to voting. Closing the vote in motion carries five to zero.

[15:05] Thank you for that. And congratulations, councilor Fyfe Malar for becoming vice chair of civic works committee, ending in 2022. Onto the consent item, we have four items before us today, looking to committee to see if you would like anything pulled separately. Councilor Van Merbergen. Thank you, if we could pull 2.4 please. Certainly, looking to councilor Van Holst. Thank you, and also pulled 2.2, thank you.

[15:46] Okay, thank you. So I’m looking for a mover and a seconder to put items 2.1 and 2.3 on the floor. Moved by councilor Helmer, seconded by councilor Fyfe Malar looking to see if there’s any questions from committee. Seeing none, we will call the question. Mayor Holder.

[17:13] Mayor Spivelli, you’re coming through. Your vote has not come through. A verbal vote, Mayor Holder is adequate at this time if you’re having technical issues. Mayor Holder, a verbal vote at this time is adequate if you’re having technical issues. I just need to know, yes, thank you. I’m now back into the mix, but I would ask you what the motion is. We’re just moving item 2.1 and 2.3 at this time, being the transportation advisory committee and the hybrid of south rehabilitation project.

[17:54] Happy to support those, thank you. And I apologize ‘cause I wasn’t able to connect. Could I trouble you and ask you who our new vice chair is? Councilor Fyfe Malar. Thank you very much. Closing the vote, the motion carries, six to zero. Item 2.2 is the supply and delivery of transit signal priority and emergency vehicle preemption system. This is our Tim’s work. It was asked to be pulled separately. So I look for a mover and a seconder and then Mr. McCrae is available to answer any questions. Moved by Councilor Fyfe Malar, seconded by Councilor Van Merbergen.

[18:30] Councilor Van Holst, I believe you pulled this one. So I’ll give you first crack at questions if you’d like to proceed. Thank you and I appreciate it. This looks like a good approach in terms of its effectiveness. My question through you, Madam Chair, to our staff is how this aligns with the smart traffic system that we had passed in the previous council. So is it integrated with that? Is this a separate thing?

[19:05] And perhaps we could just get an update on where that other project is at? Certainly, thank you for that question, Mr. McCrae. Thank you, Madam Chair. Appreciate the interest in the project. Yes, this supply and delivery of transit signal priority equipment is an integral part of that larger project that we’ve referred to as Tim’s transportation, intelligent mobility management system, otherwise known as intelligent traffic signals.

[19:42] So the project is multifaceted and involves new software. So new brains behind the traffic signal system and that implementation is underway. It also involves the installation of new controllers at all of the 413 traffic signals across the city, involves the, and the installation of the controllers is approximately halfway complete. The project also involves cameras for traffic monitoring purposes.

[20:18] 80 of them at currently around 60 installed. And these all feed back to a new transportation management center for live monitoring and communications with the transit provider emergency services and also the public. And that operation center has been operationalized just in the last few months. Are Van Holst a follow up or are you satisfied? Yes, I do have more questions about that. Thank you very much while exciting to hear that project as well on its way.

[20:56] The next question I had was about the data. It talks about data collection in here. I’m just wondering who owns and stores and evaluates the data that comes from this system. Mr. McCray. The data associated with the transit signal priority system is primarily related to the operations of the transit system. So there is a learning aspect that’s informed by transit routing and scheduling, but then it gets informed the system learns from the actual operations and tweaks and optimizes time and accordingly.

[21:46] So that’s where the data perspective lies within this component. Councillor Van Holst. Okay, thank you. So is that London Transit Commission that will have and use that data or is this the city of London doing that on behalf? And perhaps I can ask about the emergency services or where the data for those intercessions goes. Mr. McCray. Yeah, London Transit Commission is obviously a key partner in this.

[22:25] And so this system is predominantly a communication between a device on a transit bus and a device at the signal controller. So really the amount of data is relatively limited with the exception of an ongoing improvement and an optimization of the transit signal operations. Councillor Van Holst.

[23:01] Thank you. Now you’re talking about tweaking and improvement. Is there some kind of AI that’s involved in those optimizations or is it just manual? The new software system has a lot of capabilities. At the current time, we are contemplating obtaining other data sources that aren’t underway yet, but there is certainly room to grow within the system.

[23:36] But this award today doesn’t contemplate, it’s primarily limited to the machine learning of the transit system and its operations. Okay, well, thank you very much. I appreciate the answers, Madam Chair. That’s all my questions for this item. Perfect, thank you. Looking to committee or visiting Councillors, should there be any other questions or comments regarding to item 2.2? Seeing none, I’ll call the question.

[24:31] Chair again, I don’t see this on my e-scribe, but I’ll vote yes. Thank you. Madam Chair, if I may, just for the maybe the edification of the clerks, it looks like in order for me to vote, I have to refresh the screen and then click on the voting in progress. And then I get a window that stays. Otherwise, I’ll click the voting in progress. No window comes off by its own. I have to click the voting in progress.

[25:03] A window comes up and then disappears immediately. Okay, thank you for that. It might help the mayor and the clerks will look into what’s happening behind the seats. Closing the vote, the motion carries six to zero. Thank you. Regards to item 2.4, it’s the unwanted water quantifying inflow and infiltration in London’s wastewater sewer system. I’ll need a mover and a seconder for this item moved by Councillor Van Merbergen, seconded by Councillor Fai-Milar.

[25:35] And I believe it was Councillor Van Merbergen who pulled it. So I’ll go to him first to start the speaker’s list. Chair, I’d like to thank staff for this very important report, clearly, this is a huge problem that is waiting to be corrected in terms of sewage backup and so on. I mean, I can’t imagine anything worse for a homeowner than raw sewage bubbling up through the basement floor drain.

[26:12] And yet it’s happening all across London. So anything we can do to mitigate this from happening is certainly incumbent upon us. And so again, thanks for this report. I do have a question, how can a homeowner know if they’re currently connected, if their weeping tile is connected to the sanitary sewer? And I think knowledge is power. Once they know that, we can start taking, or they can start taking remedial action with some assistance from the city.

[26:46] So is it possible for a homeowner to know if they’re currently connected and how would they tell? Thank you for that question, Mr. Mathers. Through the chair, generally the, any house that was constructed before 1984 and generally after the 1920s, we’ll have that connection. So unless you’ve gone forward and done that work in the past, which was the homeowners, ideally, they would know that. If they have had that work done or if they’re previous, owner had that work done and it was subsidized through our city program, they would also have a backflow preventer.

[27:20] So they would have a chamber in the bottom of their home that they could open up and see that backflow preventer. So that would be a couple of things you could check. Beyond that, just talking to a plumber, you’d be able to figure that out as well. But we’ve actually in the past gone forward and provided door knockers in areas that were susceptible to basement flooding that had a lot of weeping tile disconnection. So those are the types of options we might look at going forward as maybe something way that we can allow people to know what do they have those connections. Councilor Van Merbergen?

[27:55] Yeah, because I have to think there’s got to be, well, I would think probably thousands of homes that are unwittingly or unknowingly connected contributing to the problem. And so if there’s a way that we can get to them and you’ve touched on that and I know in your report you’re talking about some ideas and solutions. But in a general sense, does staff have an idea of what areas in the city probably relatively high in terms of connections to the sanitary system with their weeping tiles?

[28:35] Mr. Mathers. Through the chair, absolutely. There’s approximately 50,000 homes within London that do have these connections. And what we see going forward, we’ve got this report that outlines our strategy. And then the next series of reports will be focusing on each one of these components. So we’ll have a report speaking specifically to weeping tile connections and we’ll actually provide some mapping that’ll just show basically some heat maps to show you in the areas throughout the city that have these connections. So we generally know where these homes exist and we’ll be sharing that future reports.

[29:09] Thank you, Councillor. Well, thank you for that. Because you’ve got to think there’s just so many people, obviously you’ve outlined there’s thousands. Probably you’re not aware that they’re contributing to the problem unwittingly and that once they know, and then they also know that there’s help from the city to try and correct that issue, then we’ll be at least on the way to trying to get some solution to this horrible raw sewage basement flooding problem that we run into.

[29:42] So thank you for that. Thank you, Councillor Vanholst. Thank you, Madam Chair. And I appreciate Councillor Van Merberg’s questions but it’s certainly heartbreaking to have the sewers back up on your home, especially a finished basement. My question is about, obviously this is a very big problem to challenge and one that will take a long time and a good deal of money seems that there’s maybe three ways to tackle this.

[30:20] One is at the source by separating those connections. Of course, the next thing is to have more capacity at the plants where we can hold more water and we’ve done that. My question is, are there some new technologies coming up that would allow us to process the water faster? So right now we’re using biological digestion and holding tanks, but those take a certain amount of time.

[30:56] I’m wondering if there’s new things coming up using other methods that would take the more dilute sewage which is what we receive at the plants and then process that faster. Mr. Mathers. Through the chair, absolutely. And that’s what we want to look at as part of the solution. So as the Councilor noted, we can try to deal with these issues at the source. So like at actual, from a home to home to basis or we can look at it, we call it the end of the pipe at the treatment plants.

[31:34] What we have been doing, which would, which Councilor Van Holst acknowledged was looking at faster ways to be able to treat the wastewater. Fortunately or unfortunately, when we use those types of technologies, they do result in better quality water outletting to the river. However, they are still deemed an overflow by the ministry. And there may even be other technologies but we can use looking at high rate treatment. And those are the types of things you’re gonna look at as part of this program.

[32:07] We have been very successful in trying to ensure that we have a partially treated wastewater whenever we can. And there’s always limits to that. But of course, we’re very excited to learn about any kind of new technology and a high rate treatment might be a technology that might be beneficial to us in this situation. Thank you, Councilor Van Holst. Thank you, that’s my question, Madam Chair. Thank you, as it relates to this, I’ll just comment that the city does have a weeping tile disconnection program that had undergone some changes during COVID recognizing people and how comfortable they are with people entering their homes and putting more opportunities for individual homeowners to make the decisions that they feel right with the city’s program of people entering their homes.

[32:56] So thank you to staff for this report. I have no one else on my speaker’s list. It’s been moved and seconded. Councilor Helmer. Thank you to the chair. I just wanted to ask about the chart that’s on page 15 of the report and it’s showing the percentage of unwanted water as a percentage of the total water treated at the wastewater treatment plants. So my question through the chair to staff is, what is going on with the overall volumes of those two things, so the total wastewater and then the unwanted water.

[33:36] Are they both going up substantially? I’m just looking at the trend from the early 90s to now and it’s quite a large increase in the percentage. I wonder if you just tell us what’s going on with the overall volumes. Thank you for anyone that is page 15 of the report, Mr. Mathers. Through the chair, so the volumes have been increasing generally at the plants. However, it’s a bit more of a complicated story because as we’ve mentioned to council in the past, since 2002, the amount of water that’s actually being used by Londoners has decreased and starting to level off.

[34:13] So the figure would, in general, as new development moves forward, we are getting larger amounts of flow at the plants. So it is a bit more complex than what’s being shown in this figure, in general, we are able to on a dry weather day and it’ll be out of flows that are coming to our plants. But the figure that the actual flows of the plants would be a little bit more complex than what’s shown here. If that’s something that council is interested in, I think that would be a good inclusion for our next report that’s gonna be discussing options at the treatment plants and that could be provided a little bit more baseline data for committee to consider as well.

[34:58] I’m seeing nods from committee members, so please include that as you’re able to in the next update to committee and council. Councilor Hamillar, a follow-up? Yeah, just a brief comment. I do think it’d be helpful to see it, you know, generally, I think we’ve been doing our planning around wastewater treatment capacity, you know, looking at the declining sort of per household use for water and that may be a bit of a best case scenario kind of planning if we’re gonna have this kind of amount of volume coming from inflow and infiltration.

[35:33] And so I’m a little concerned about some of the growth planning around wastewater treatment. Yeah, so I think the better we understand what’s going on there, you know, the better we can be targeted in what we’re doing. I was glad that Councilor Van Buren pointed out how significant the problem is. And certainly it’s one of these issues where individual property owners and homeowners, sooner they act to do something to relieve some of the pressure, the better. And early action is a lot better than waiting around the cost to the overall system, $1.4 million, that’s a lot.

[36:13] It’s a lot of money every year, energy costs, the operating costs of having to treat all that excess water. And I really appreciate this report. Thanks very much. Thank you, Councilor Van Holst. Is that a new hand up or a remnant of your hand? Yes, thank you. Just moving on that, I was interested in the chart too, and somewhat surprised at the amount of unwanted water, although in other communities, I understand it can be more. The, it’s my question would be, do we have a fairly good idea of how much of this water might be from leaky and cracked sanitary lines, or it’s actually an infiltration of rainwater through the ground into the sanitary lines.

[37:10] And if we do, do we have a sense of where, where those might be, I guess, to be more specific? Is there one treatment plant that seems to be more affected than another? Thank you, Mr. Mathers. Through the chair, that’s actually the analysis that we’re doing right as we speak. So we’re taking a look at, because we have pumping stations throughout the city, we have the treatment plants across the city, we can use that comparative data to see whether how severe a concern is in one area versus another.

[37:46] I will just say in a general sense that, and this is based on a lot of study work in the past, and what we see in other municipalities is that those weeping tiles are the bulk of these issues during a large storm event. The amount of water that we can get through, these weeping tiles can be even greater than having a faucet completely turned on. And when you get that from 50,000 homes, and that’s a lot of water, definitely during some of these events, there would be some issues with the existing infrastructure. So what we’re gonna do is take a look at on just your normal dry day, how much water is getting into the system, and that gives you an idea of just the general beakiness.

[38:23] And then that will help us to make some decisions going forward and ideally even look at some new technologies that might be able to help us as well. So that is the work that we’re doing right now, and we’ll be able to provide more information to committee as we progress. Thank you. Mr. May, there’s any estimate of when that report would be coming back to us, like Q3 next year or? So I would like to do it in a series of reports. So ideally we would have one in Q3 and then in Q4 as well, as we kind of build on all of these issues.

[38:57] So that’s the current projection. Thank you. Councilor Van Holst, your hands down. So I’m assuming that you’re good, looking to committee or visiting Council with any further questions or comments, seeing none, calling the question. Closing the vote, the motion carries six to zero.

[39:39] Thank you. I have no scheduled items. Under items for direction, we have 4.1, a conceptual framework for regional transportation in London. This is coming back to us as per prior council resolution for a follow up and it pertains to also other opportunities for regional transportation and provincial and federal funding. Mr. Barrett’s team is with us today and who does have a presentation to go through. It’s gonna be about six minute-ish presentation. Their slide deck is in the added agenda. So please turn to that and I will turn it over to Greg Barrett and his team and his several team members with him today for this process.

[40:21] Thank you, Madam Chair. Just turn it directly over to Mr. Edward who will take you through the presentation. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Barrett. So yeah, my name is Kevin Edwards, manager in planning and development. And this, as the chair noted, this report is a follow up on a council direction from August to develop a conceptual framework for a regional mobility hub in downtown London, including working with LTC to explore potential connections and local transit routes. So as a bit of context, recently, there’s been several developments that have had implications for regional transportation. Including greyhound ending operations, federal announcements regarding enhancements to rail service in the region, provincial deregulation of inner city bus routes and the start of a gold pilot to Kitchener in Toronto.

[41:05] And at the same time, several things have been happening in the background. So in particular, the city and regional population continues to grow at a good rate and an increasing rate. And employment growth is leading to a high demand for talent. And a key ongoing challenge has been lower labor participation rates and a lack of transportation is regularly cited as a top barrier to joining the workforce for respondents. At the same time, also in 2019, the province released connecting the Southwest. And this is a draft transportation plan for Southwestern Ontario. And the plan seeks to improve connectivity, regional connectivity and economics prosperity and highlights the need to improve inter-community transportation for underserved rural areas and to identify opportunities to integrate different modes to make it easier for people to get around.

[41:51] And a mayor is an indigenous chief’s task force chaired by Mayor Holder has been established with a focus on improving connections between different modes in the region. I think another important piece to highlight here is that there’s an emphasis on this draft plan as being a living plan. So the plan is structured as a bottom up approach that is to be informed by local needs and considerations. So with that in mind, it’s an opportune time to review how the various modes of regional transportation can best connect to London and identify opportunities to integrate these different modes. So when we got into this and we started our consultations, it quickly became apparent that the project required more of a city-wide review based on the directions and the draft plan, but also the initial feedback we received.

[42:34] And the notion of a downtown terminal was important, but regional connectivity into the city happens at several places and it’s important to understand how London relates to the region. So we started with a review of London in the regional context and the city structure and the planning framework. And those maps are on page 37 in the presentation. And through this, London is recognized in the report as the regional center for southwestern Ontario. So it’s the region’s largest population center, but also a major hub for healthcare, education, employment, retail, tourism and culture events.

[43:08] And next we reviewed the area’s transportation systems. And as I mentioned earlier, for the draft provincial transportation plan, improving inter-community transportation is a key priority. And in 2019, the province began funding for room municipalities to provide some transit services. And although with the pandemic many didn’t get started until 2020, the province recently announced that that funding is being extended to 2025. And around London, five of these inter-community routes currently connect into London from the north, from the west and from the east, three connect into the city at Masonville, two connect at Fanshawe and one connects through downtown and onto the airport.

[43:44] Also there’s regional bus operators that have started after Greyhound ceased operations. Currently there was mainly stops off 401. However, routes are changing in summer, starting to migrate more into downtown and into the and closer to western. So with a better understanding of the context, staff then reached out to a broad range of regional transportation stakeholders. And we were able to meet with several transit agencies, regional municipalities, economic development groups to get their insights and opportunities to improve regional transportation. And the main message we heard was that inter-community routes provide several rules.

[44:20] Some are geared to commuting, some to healthcare, some to shopping. But a consistent theme was that connectivity needs to be two-way between London and surrounding areas. So it’s not just moving people into London, it’s also moving people into the surrounding areas. Stakeholders identified that the via rail station is the most important regional hub. They did have a desire to connect to downtown but there was a concern that this would add on planned operating hours and duplicate service to downtown that’s being provided by the LTC. And the stakeholders felt the most efficient ways in many cases to move in our community riders is to link into well-connected outer hubs like Masonville, Fanshawe, Wellington 401 and then use local transit to get people to their destinations around the city, including downtown and its inter-regional connections.

[45:05] So with that in mind, several stakeholders identified that the success of a downtown mobility hub really depends on strong connectivity between the RT stops and the train station and vehicle service. Now, when using the outer hubs, there was a desire to use the existing terminals. However, they’re often unavailable and they’re operating it over capacity. So often what this results is it’s inter-community services having to use the closest on street LTC stop and the riders having to track back to make their connections. Other comments related to a desire for better coordination with LTC, future fair integration, those sorts of things.

[45:40] And a key finding within London is up there are two types of hubs. So downtown functions as the primary inter-regional hub that moves you to the GTA, the broader other regions and that includes the rapid transit hubs, the downtown loop and the train station. But also there’s four secondary hubs where transit routes converge that are also identified in the northwest, east and south of downtown. And these really serve large areas of the city, but also act as major connection points for surrounding municipalities. So the map on slide 46 identifies these conceptual connections to surrounding areas and conceptual transportation hub locations.

[46:19] And the framework identifies some preliminary opportunities to integrate these regional connections. Stakeholder conversations also identified five recommended opportunities, including improving data collection methods for decision making, improving user experience, improving increasing service awareness and allowing flexibility to allow for innovation and alternative service delivery models. So in summary, several recent developments have occurred with implications for regional transportation. At the same time, Southwestern Ontario continues to grow in population employment. And the need to get ahead of that rapid growth will become increasingly important.

[46:55] London plays a pivotal role and will continue to do so into the future as the largest regional urban center and the place where transportation systems converge for the region. So the draft plan, the draft transportation plan from the province is looking to be informed by local needs and considerations. And we’ve worked with regional partners and the conceptual framework identifies opportunities in London to improve regional connectivity. And finally, with council endorsement, the framework can be used as a basis to discuss regional transportation opportunities with the province, regional municipalities and other transportation stakeholders to advance provincial leadership in regional transportation and mobility of Southwestern Ontario.

[47:34] So this concludes my presentation and happy to answer any questions committee may have. Thank you for your presentation and the slide deck, as I mentioned, it is included in the added agenda for people joining us virtually as well. I will start my speakers list with Mayor Holder. Well, thanks very much, Chair. If there’s a second to this, I would like to endorse either to move the staff recommendations and then speak to it if I can. Okay, are you willing to move 4.1 A and B being the staff presentation and a letter of support received by Mr. Chambers, Chair of SCORE EDC?

[48:14] Frankly, all the above. Okay, perfect, so moved by Mayor Holder, a seconded by Councillor Fyff-Milar. And Mayor Holder, please proceed with your comments. Thanks very much. We did receive a very compelling communication from SCORE EDC. That’s the, for those who don’t know that are listening and that’s the South Central Ontario Region Economic Development Corporation. That is a considerable group and what they have done is they’ve acknowledged London as the transportation hub of our region and what became really clear, and I’ve turned your attention to the third paragraph where they say building a strong recovery and renewal for Ontario requires enhancing regional transportation options and accessibility across the region.

[49:08] And that’s why their endorsement is so, so significant for us. We also, by the way, received separately support from the Mayor of Tilsonburg, Mayor Molnar, we received separate support in a letter as well from the Mayor of Kent Center is now the warden of Middlesex County, Alison Warwick. And we have, through my, in my capacity, as Chair of the South Western Ontario Transportation Fast Task Force, received verbal, which we will move to written confirmations from several municipalities who are part of the task force.

[49:52] And I share this only because I think what all of these community members have realized is that the interdependence amongst municipalities is so critical. You heard in our presentation today, a lot of talk around inner city mobility and the role of the Corps and outside the court. All of that is what’s also true is that for Sarnia Windsor, Tilsonburg, Leemington, Stratford, St. Mary, Strathroy, St. Thomas, for these communities who happen to be members of the task force for our First Nations communities in the region, we need strong interplay with London as the transportation hub.

[50:44] The economic spin-offs for the whole region are unquestionable. The benefits for everyone within the, that’s impacted by the South Western Ontario various forms of transportation, which by the way, isn’t just inner city, isn’t just rail, although that’s very, very strong, isn’t just air, isn’t just roads and highways, isn’t just fairies and bridges. I mean, it crosses the gamut and we will be presenting a report. So, you know, to the province, but it really does help as we present this in the next month to the province to have the support of communities right across the province and to have our own councils support.

[51:30] I’d like to thank our council for their commitment to this and to our staff for what they have done in terms of not only just putting this report together, but putting sincere thought in behind the words. I think it’s critical and I’d like to applaud them as well. This is, I think these are exciting opportunities for London and for South Western Ontario and we need to cease hold of it. Thank you. Thank you for that as comments and that’s very important report as progress for regional hub, looking to other committee members or guest councilors who wish to speak.

[52:11] Hey, I’ll recognize councilor Vanholz next. Thank you, Madam Chair. So, one of the interesting points made was that we’ll be relying quite a bit on the secondary transportation hubs for the outlying communities as they’re placed to land in London and then move around the city. And whereas, I see Wellington Road and Masonville is kind of obvious and easier places for that to happen.

[52:49] The hub at Fanshawe College seems to be, a bit more challenging in terms of, I’ll say, just parking. So, I wonder if staff could comment on what’s needed in that area or will we make use of Argonne Mall as that place for people from the region to sort of land in the east end.

[53:26] Thank you to staff. So, through the chair, I think it’s important to note that this is a conceptual framework. So, really what we’re identifying here is that there’s primary hubs and secondary hubs. And for the east, I think it’s always important as part of a hub that there’s integrated a transit. So, you’ve got routes converging, there’s opportunities for regional transportation. I think it’s more of a pin on a map. So, as I guess planning progresses in those areas, it may not land exactly on that point.

[54:00] It may be in that broader area where we can accomplish a lot of those things. So, I don’t think we’re certainly beholden to a specific location at this point. We’re just noting that in that general area, there needs to be the coordination of the transit. And Madam Chair, sorry, through you. If I could also just jump on that. I think another thing that’s important to note is that, and it was outlined in the report, is that there’s a reliance on integration with our existing transportation system delivered by the LTC. So, opportunities could exist at Fantas, part of a terminus for the RT route.

[54:35] Argyle Mall, as you suggested, ‘cause right now that’s a terminal location for LTC. And as Mr. Edward suggested, as we get into this and find out what other opportunities exist, for example, extension to the airport, maybe another opportunity. So, this is really, as Mr. Edward said, putting the pins in the ground, looking at the framework. And as you noted, Councillor Van Holst, the our regional providers at this point are looking to come, sort of to the ends of the spokes. So, it’d be working with them to determine where those ends of the spokes are as we go through this process. Thank you.

[55:09] If I could ask then, when do you think you’d be back with more details as this is just a conceptual framework? What is your hopes for a timeframe? I’ll jump in and then Mr. Edward can certainly follow. A lot of this is gonna be driven by a work that’s coming out of the task force and initiatives that will be coming from the province. As we noted, when we started this whole process, it’s to give us essentially our document and our talking notes as we have these discussions as we go forward, both through the task force, the mirrors on and through the provincial initiatives that we see coming down the pipe as it relates to regional transportation.

[55:52] So, our timeline is very much gonna be driven by those folks, but certainly it’s something if this committee wished we could report back within, at some point next year as to where it’s going and where it actually sits. And that’s something we could endeavor to just come back and just give you an information report to let you know where it is and where we’re progressing in those conversations. Thank you for that. Councilor Van Holst, a follow-up? No more than just the comment that I think a route to the airport is quite significant. And I think when there was the discussion of rail lines out from London to Toronto, there was the talk about having a stop there as well.

[56:43] But I certainly see that having good access to the airport would make a big difference for us in a number of ways. I don’t need to go into detail at this point since it’s just conceptual. Thank you for that. Turning to look for other speakers, I’ll recognize Deputy Mayor Morgan. Thank you for joining us today. Yes, thank you, Chair. I have a question and then I’d like to make some comments. My question is on the section of the report related to the Mobility Master Plan. And in that section, it talks about the consultation process and we know the design of the Mobility Master Plan and the timelines associated with it.

[57:23] It mentions that recommendations from the Mobility Master Plan are likely to be made throughout the process. And that this regional transportation framework isn’t intended to presuppose the outcome of that process. However, I do think that the framework is a good way of us having, as mentioned right in the report, something to consult with regional partners on federal funders. And so I wonder if staff can elaborate on how those processes are integrated and how we take advantage of short-term opportunities and funding opportunities.

[57:59] Well, at the same time, not getting ahead of the Mobility Master Plan by actually using this framework as a gap between now it and that development. Thank you, to staff. Happy to jump in. It’s Adam Thompson, manager of government general relations. So that’s what an excellent question. We have a provincial election coming up that’ll be an important opportunity to talk about regional priorities, including transportation. The mayor’s involvement and leadership of the MTO working group is an excellent input into the process as well.

[58:39] So conversations around these types of investments and regional planning opportunities, these are understandably longer-term conversations. There’s a lot of money involved, a lot of planning involved. So we’re trying to keep our expectations realistic on what we can drive in the immediate term. So longer-term, I think we’ll see the sort of longer time, the timeframe of the Mobility Master Plan aligned with some of the important conversations we’re gonna have to build, not just consensus, but buy in from other levels of government around this.

[59:18] But this allows us to start a conversation, which is the most important part to launch this pro lease conversation. Deputy Mayor Morgan. Yeah, thank you for that answer. And I think understanding that this is a framework that we will build from, I think is key to the points you just made and obviously something that staff has articulated very clearly in the report. On the actual framework itself, I’m very supportive of the staff report and I appreciate the work they’ve done.

[59:52] I think the mayor articulated very well the importance of this work and how it integrates with some of the other processes moving on. I know when the mayor and I first had the opportunity to chat about this before it came to council, one of the things we chatted about was the linkage into our strategic plan. The vision of our strategic plan for those who can’t remember ‘cause it was a few years back is to be a leader in commerce, culture and innovation, our region’s connection to the world. And it’s that connection to the world piece that I think involves London being strategically situated for our rural communities and our region.

[1:00:28] As was articulated in the letters of support and the report itself, we are a convergence of multiple forms of mobility and transportation within our city and the organization and efficiency of the transition between those points, I think is really critical to moving people, goods, employment opportunities, economic growth of not just the city of London, but the region, which is why I think our approach to this has been excellent. It is a conversation that involves regional partners and one of those things where all of our interests are aligned and we’re pulling together on something really important for not just the city about the region.

[1:01:05] That’s why you’ve seen letters of support from mayors and economic development agencies for this framework. Obviously, there is an exceptional amount of work ahead and that work will involve a number of actors, both our regional municipalities, economic development agencies, but also the government agencies as well as the private sector transportation providers who are doing work in this space as well. And I think this all happens at a time of great opportunity, as Mr. Thompson said, there’s a provincial election, the province has already expressed significant support for transportation projects in the area with the micro transit, as well as the organization of the task force that the mayor and his task force will report back to the province on.

[1:01:56] They are in a well positioned to think strategically about this. And of course, the federal government, having just gone through an election, has obviously made the support of transit and an integration of transit a priority with their announcements related to VIA and their funding programs that they’ve set up related to e-buses and general investments in transit. It seems like everything is converging at a really good time to have this framework in place and have these conversations with both our regional partners, our private sector partners, as well as our government partners on this. So I’m pretty excited about the framework and I know it’s the start of a lot of work and a lot of conversations, but I think it’s a good base to start this discussion from.

[1:02:36] And already, it shows the level of support and interest from multiple players on a project as important as this. Thank you. Looking to other committee members or guests for a comment. Hey, it’s been Councillor Van Halst. Thank you. Might bring up the topic of ride-sharing parking lots. That seems to be something that was a focus of our appreciative, a while back, certainly in the, maybe the beginning of the last term, there was that idea encouraging people to share rides coming into the city that involved having some places for people to park near the edge of the city.

[1:03:29] Do we see that kind of thing happening at these transportation hubs? Or is that something we might be better off establishing, near the corners of the map? But maybe I just asked for a comment on that. Thank you to staff, recognizing this is just your conceptual framework. Thank you through the chair. And this is something I think would pass on to our colleagues in transportation, but I believe the answer was given earlier. We don’t want to presuppose the mobility master plan on this.

[1:04:03] So those are, I believe the kinds of things that are going to be looking at the mobility master plan, how that then relates to tying into the regional transportation network with something that we would that look at. Thank you, Councillor, satisfied. Thank you. Looking for any further questions or comments. Seeing none, it’s been moved and seconded, calling the question. Councillor Van Muirbergen, Councillor, do you need to do a verbal vote?

[1:05:04] You’re muted. Yeah, I’ll vote yes. Thank you. Closing the vote, the motion carries, six to zero. Moving on to number five, being our deferred matters list. There’s item four on it, which was doing Q4 2021. Staff advise that we’ll be ready for us in Q1 of 2022. So that will be updated for our next meeting. Looking to committee see if there’s any other questions or comments on the deferred matters list. If not, I would need a mover and a seconder.

[1:05:39] Moved by Councillor Fyff-Milar, seconded by Councillor Van Holst. Looking for other questions or comments. Seeing none, calling the question. Oh, yes. Thank you. Closing the vote, the motion carries, six to zero.

[1:06:13] This on to adjournment moved by Councillor Van Muirbergen, seconded by Councillor Van Holst. I’ve been notified that a hand vote is okay. So all in favor of adjournment and parting ways today, the motion is passed. Thank you, that concludes the first meeting of the Civic Risk Committee and wishing you all a wonderful day.