March 29, 2022, at 12:00 PM

Original link

1.   Disclosures of Pecuniary Interest

That it BE NOTED that no pecuniary interests were disclosed.

2.   Consent

Moved by M. van Holst

Seconded by P. Van Meerbergen

That Items 2.1, 2.2, 2.3, 2.4, 2.5, 2.6 BE APPROVED.

Motion Passed (6 to 0)

2.1   2nd Report of the Transportation Advisory Committee

2022-02-22 TAC Report

Moved by M. van Holst

Seconded by P. Van Meerbergen

That the 2nd Report of the Transportation Advisory Committee, from its meeting held on February 22, 2022, BE RECEIVED.

Motion Passed

2.2   2021 Ministry of the Environment, Conservation and Parks Inspection of the City of London Drinking Water System

2022-03-29 SR - 2021 Ministry of the Environment, Conservation and Parks Inspection oftheCity

Moved by M. van Holst

Seconded by P. Van Meerbergen

That, on the recommendation of the Deputy City Manager, Environment and Infrastructure, the staff report dated March 29, 2022, with respect to the Ministry of the Environment, Conservation and Parks Inspection of the City of London Drinking Water System BE RECEIVED for information. (2022-E13)

Motion Passed

2.3   Wastewater Treatment Operations Energy Savings Report

2022-03-29 SR - Wastewater Treatment Operations Energy Savings Report

Moved by M. van Holst

Seconded by P. Van Meerbergen

That, on the recommendation of the Deputy City Manager, Environment and Infrastructure, the staff report dated March 29, 2022, with respect to the achievements of the Wastewater Treatment Operations Division in reducing energy consumption BE RECEIVED for information. (2022-E03)

Motion Passed

2.4   Disaster Mitigation and Adaption Fund - Contribution Agreement

2022-03-29 SR - Disaster Mitigation and Adaption Fund - Contribution Agreement (1of2)

2022-03-29 SR - Disaster Mitigation and Adaption Fund - Contribution Agreement (2of2)

Moved by M. van Holst

Seconded by P. Van Meerbergen

That, on the recommendation of the Deputy City Manager, Environment and Infrastructure, the proposed by-law as appended to the staff report dated March 29, 2022, BE INTRODUCED at the Municipal Council meeting to be held on April 12, 2022, to approve the Contribution Agreement for Disaster Mitigation and Adaptation Fund (DMAF) between Her Majesty the Queen in right of Canada as represented by the Minister of Infrastructure and Communities and The Corporation of the City of London (“Agreement”) and authorize the Mayor and City Clerk to execute the Agreement and any future amending agreements. (2022-P03)

Motion Passed

2.5   Appointment of Consulting Engineer - Detailed Design - Southdale Road West and Colonel Talbot Road Roundabout

2022-03-29 - SR - Appointment of Consulting Engineer - Detailed Design Southdale Road West and Colonel Talbot Road (1of2)

2022-03-29 - SR - Appointment of Consulting Engineer - Detailed Design Southdale Road West and Colonel Talbot Road(2of2)

Moved by M. van Holst

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 March 29, 2022, related to the appointment of a consulting engineer for the Southdale Road West and Colonel Talbot Road Roundabout project:

a)    AECOM Canada Ltd. BE APPOINTED Consulting Engineers to complete the detailed design and tendering services of the project as per the AECOM Canada Ltd. work plan, in the total amount of $488,375.00, 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 project 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 project;

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, if required, to give effect to these recommendations. (2022-T05)

Motion Passed

2.6   Appointment of Consulting Engineers for Contract Administration Services: 2022 Infrastructure Renewal Program

2022-03-29 SR - Appointment of Consulting Engineers for Contract Administration Services 2022 Infrastructure Renewal (1of3)

2022-03-29 SR - Appointment of Consulting Engineers for Contract Administration Services 2022 Infrastructure Renewal(2of2)

2022-03-29 SR - Appointment of Consulting Engineers for Contract Administration Services 2022 Infrastructure Renewal(3of3)

Moved by M. van Holst

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 March 29, 2022, related to the appointment of consulting engineers for the 2022 Infrastructure Renewal Program:

a)    the following consulting engineers BE APPOINTED to carry out consulting services for the identified Infrastructure Renewal Program funded projects, at the upset amounts identified below, in accordance with the estimate on file, and in accordance with Section 15.2(g) of the City of London’s Procurement of Goods and Services Policy:

i)    Dillon Consulting Limited (Dillon) BE APPOINTED consulting engineers to complete the resident inspection and contract administration of 2022 Infrastructure Renewal Project Regent Street and William Street, in the total amount of $498,142.70, including contingency, excluding HST;

ii)    GM Blueplan Engineering Limited (GM Blueplan) BE APPOINTED consulting engineers to complete the resident inspection and contract administration of Pottersburg Phase 1 Contract 6: Dundas Street, Spruce Street, and Burdick Place reconstruction, in the total amount of $384,120.00, including contingency, excluding HST;

iii)    Archibald, Gray & McKay Engineering Ltd. (AGM) BE APPOINTED consulting engineers to complete the resident inspection and contract administration of Contract 5: Glen Cairn Phase 1 reconstruction, in the total amount of $360,800.00, including contingency, excluding HST;

b)    the financing for this project 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 project;

d)     the approval given, herein, BE CONDITIONAL upon the Corporation entering into a formal contract; 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. (2022-A05)

Motion Passed

3.   Scheduled Items

3.1   Amendments to Consolidated Fees and Charges By-law - Dundas Street Vendor Pilot Program

2022-03-29 SR - PPM - Amendments to the Consolidated Fees and Charges By-law Dundas Place Street Vendor

Moved by J. Fyfe-Millar

Seconded by M. van Holst

That, on the recommendation of the Deputy City Manager, Planning and Economic Development, on the advice of the Director, Economic Services and Supports, the proposed by-law as appended to the staff report dated March 29, 2022, BE INTRODUCED at the Municipal Council meeting to be held on April 12, 2022, to amend By-law No. A-57 being, “A by-law to provide for Various Fees and Charges” and to repeal By-law A-56, as amended, being “A by-law to provide for Various Fees and Charges” by adding fees related to the Dundas Place Street Vendor Pilot Program;

it being noted that no individuals spoke at the public participation meeting associated with this matter;

it being noted that the communication from B. Robinson, with respect to this matter, was received. (2022-C01)

Motion Passed (6 to 0)

Additional Votes:

Moved by M. van Holst

Seconded by E. Holder

Motion to open the public participation meeting.

Motion Passed (6 to 0)

Moved by P. Van Meerbergen

Seconded by E. Holder

Motion to close the public participation meeting.

Motion Passed (6 to 0)

4.   Items for Direction

Moved by M. van Holst

Seconded by E. Holder

That Items 4.1, 4.2, and 4.3 BE APPROVED.

Motion Passed (6 to 0)

4.1   2022 Renew London Infrastructure Construction Program and 2021 Review

2022-03-29 SR - 2022 Renew London Infrastructure Constructon Program and 2021 Review

Moved by M. van Holst

Seconded by E. Holder

That, on the recommendation of the Deputy City Manager, Environment and Infrastructure, the staff report dated March 29, 2022, with respect to the 2022 Renew London Infrastructure Construction Program BE RECEIVED for information. (2022-T04)

Motion Passed

4.2   Contract Price Increase: 2021 Transportation Infrastructure Renewal Report

2022-03-29 SR - Contract Price Increase 2021 Transporation Infrastructure Renewal Report (1of4)

2022-03-29 SR - Contract Price Increase 2021 Transportation Infrastructure Renewal Report App. A

2022-03-29 SR - Contract Price Increase 2021 Transportation Infrastructure App. B

2022-03-29 SR - Contract Price Increase 2021 Transportation Infrastructure Renewal Report App. C

Moved by M. van Holst

Seconded by E. Holder

That, on the recommendation of the Deputy City Manager, Environment and Infrastructure, the following actions be taken with respect to the staff report dated March 29, 2022, related to the three projects: 2020 Arterial Road Rehabilitation Project Contract 2, 2021 Fanshawe Park Road Boulevard Cycling Lanes Rehabilitation, and the 2021 Dundas Thames Valley Parkway (TVP) Active Transportation Connection:

a)    the 2020 Arterial Road Rehabilitation Project Contract 2 (Tender T20-100) contract value with Coco Paving Inc. (Coco) BE INCREASED by $470,000.00 to $3,038,000.00, excluding HST, in accordance with Section 20.3(e) of the City of London’s Procurement of Goods and Services Policy;

b)    the Fanshawe Park Road Boulevard Cycling lanes Rehabilitation Contract (Tender RFT21-83) contract value with Dufferin Construction Company, A division of CRH Canada Group Inc., BE INCREASED by $250,000.00 to $1,735,102.20, excluding HST, in accordance with Section 20.3(e) of the City of London’s Procurement of Goods and Services Policy;

c)    the contract with IBI Group Professional Services (Canada) Inc. for construction inspection and contract administration for the Dundas Street Thames Valley Parkway Active Transportation Connection Project BE INCREASED by $91,800.00 to $414,990.00, excluding HST, in accordance with Section 20.3(e) of the City of London’s Procurement of Goods and Services Policy;

d)    the financing for these projects BE APPROVED as set out in the Sources of Financing Reports as appended to the above-noted staff report;

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

f)    the Mayor and the City Clerk BE AUTHORIZED to execute any contract or other documents, if required, to give effect to these recommendations. (2022-T10)

Motion Passed

4.3   Contract Price Increase: 2021 Water/Wastewater Infrastructure Renewal Report

2022-03-29 SR - Contract Price Increase 2021 Water Wastewater infrastructure Renewal Report

2022-03-29 SR - Contract Price increase 2021 Water Wastewater Infrastructure Renewal Report App. A

Moved by M. van Holst

Seconded by E. Holder

That, on the recommendation of the Deputy City Manager, Environment and Infrastructure, the following actions be taken with respect to the staff report dated March 29, 2022, related to the English Street and Lorne Avenue Reconstruction project:

a)    the Lorne Avenue Reconstruction (Tender T21-16) contract value with 2376378 Ontario Corp (CH Excavating (2013)) BE INCREASED by $675,000.00 to $4,448,382.95, excluding HST, in accordance with Section 20.3(e) of the City of London’s Procurement of Goods and Services Policy;

b)     the financing for this project 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 project; and,

d)    the Mayor and the City Clerk BE AUTHORIZED to execute any contract or other documents, if required, to give effect to these recommendations. (2022-E03/L04)

Motion Passed

4.4   Metamora Stormwater Outfall Replacement - Contract Award Increase (RFT21-91)

2022-03-29 SR - Metamora Stormwater Outfall Replacement - Contract Award Increase (RFT21-91)(1of2)

2022-03-29 SR - Metamora Stormwater Outfall Replacement - Contract Award Increase (RFT21-91) (2of2)

Moved by E. Holder

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 March 29, 2022, related to the award of contract for the Metamora Stormwater Outfall Replacement and Slope Rehabilitation:

a)    the contract award increase for BlueCon Construction for additional construction costs of $200,486.00, including 20% contingency, excluding HST, for the Metamora Stormwater Outfall Replacement and Slope Rehabilitation works, BE APPROVED, resulting in a total contract value of $1,200,386.00;

b)    the financing for this project 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 work;

d)    the approvals given, herein, BE CONDITIONAL upon the Corporation entering into a formal contract with the consultant for the project; 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. (2022-E03/L04)

Motion Passed (6 to 0)

4.5   Contract Award: Tender RFT 21-97 Adelaide Street North CPR Underpass Project - Irregular Result

2022-03-29- SR - Contract Award Tender RFT 21-97 Adelaide Street North CPR Underpass Project-Irregular(1of2)

2022-03-29- SR- Contract Award Tender RFT 21-97 Adelaide Street North CPR Underpass Project-Irregular(2of2)

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 March 29, 2022, related to the Adelaide Street North CPR Underpass Project:

a)    the bid submitted by McLean Taylor Construction Limited at its tendered price of $60,191,223.44, excluding HST, BE ACCEPTED in accordance with Section 8.10(a) and 13.2(b) of the City of London’s Procurement of Goods and Services Policy; it being noted that this is an irregular result because the cost exceeds the project budget;  it being further noted that the bid submitted by McLean Taylor Construction Limited was the lowest of three bids received and meets the City’s specifications and requirements;

b)    WSP Canada Inc. Consulting Engineers BE AUTHORIZED to complete the contract administration and construction supervision required for this project as well as additional engineering activities, all in accordance with the estimate on file, at an upset amount of $5,280,625.90, including contingencies, excluding HST, and in accordance with Section 15.2(g) of the City of London’s Procurement of Goods and Services Policy;

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

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

e)    the approvals given, herein, BE CONDITIONAL upon the Corporation entering into a formal contract with the consultant for the work;

f)     the approvals given, herein, BE CONDITIONAL upon the Corporation entering into a formal contract for the material to be supplied and the work to be done relating to this project (Tender 21-97); and,

g)    the Mayor and the City Clerk BE AUTHORIZED to execute any contract or other documents including railway purchase orders, if required, to give effect to these recommendations. (2022-T05)

Motion Passed (6 to 0)

4.6   Contract Award: Tender RFT-2022-001 Southdale Road West Improvements Phase 1

2022-03-29 SR - Contract Award Tender RFT-2022-001 Southdale Road West Improvements Phase 1 (1of2)

2022-03-29 SR - Contract Award Tender RFT-2022-001 Southdale Road West Improvements Phase 1 (2of2)

Moved by J. Fyfe-Millar

Seconded by M. van Holst

That, on the recommendation of the Deputy City Manager, Environment and Infrastructure, the following actions be taken with respect to the staff report dated March 29, 2022, related to the Southdale Road West Improvements Phase 1 Project between Bostwick Road and Pine Valley Boulevard (Tender RFT-2022-001):

a)    the bid submitted by L82 Construction Ltd., at its tendered price of $10,177,967.69, excluding HST, BE ACCEPTED; it being noted that the bid submitted by L82 Construction Ltd. was the lowest of three bids received and meets the City’s specifications and requirements in all areas;

b)    AECOM Canada Ltd. BE AUTHORIZED to complete the contract administration and construction inspection for this project in accordance with the estimate, on file, at an upset amount of $447,398.00, excluding HST, in accordance with Section 15.2(g) of the City of London’s Procurement of Goods and Services Policy;

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

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

e)    the approvals given, herein, BE CONDITIONAL upon the Corporation entering into a formal contract with the consultant for the work;

f)     the approvals given, herein, BE CONDITIONAL upon the Corporation entering into a formal contract for the material to be supplied and the work to be done relating to this project (RFT-2022-001); and,

g)     the Mayor and the City Clerk BE AUTHORIZED to execute any contract or other documents, if required, to give effect to these recommendations. (2022-T05)

Motion Passed (6 to 0)

4.7   Report on Downtown Road Closures 

Report on Downtown Road Closures - Councillor M. van Holst

Moved by E. Holder

Seconded by E. Peloza

That the communication from Councillor M. van Holst, with respect to a report on Downtown road closures BE RECEIVED and NO ACTION BE TAKEN. (2022-C09)

Motion Passed (5 to 1)

5.   Deferred Matters/Additional Business

5.1   Deferred Matters List

CWC DEFERRED MATTERS as at March 21, 2022

Moved by J. Helmer

Seconded by E. Holder

That the Civic Works Committee Deferred Matters List as at March 21, 2022, BE RECEIVED.

Motion Passed (6 to 0)

5.2   (ADDED) Kenmore Place Sidewalk Petition

2022-03-29 PS - T. Jamieson, Kenmore Place Sidewalk Petition, REQUEST FOR DELEGATION STATUS

Moved by J. Helmer

Seconded by P. Van Meerbergen

That the petition from T. Jamieson, with respect to the Kenmore Place sidewalk construction, BE RECEIVED;

it being noted that Civic Administration will engage in further consultation with the residents to determine the placement of the sidewalk on Kenmore Place on the east or west side of the street.

Motion Passed (6 to 0)

6.   Adjournment

Moved by M. van Holst

Seconded by P. Van Meerbergen

That the meeting BE ADJOURNED.

Motion Passed (6 to 0)

The meeting adjourned at 1:13 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, 23 minutes)

Good afternoon. This is the fifth meeting of the Civic Works Committee held virtually during the COVID-19 emergency. The City of London is committed to making every effort to provide alternate formats and communication supports for council’s standing or advisory committee meetings and information upon request. To make requests for any city service, please contact accessibility@london.ca or 519-661-2489 extension 2425.

To make requests specific to this meeting, please contact CWC@london.ca. For those viewing, I have Councillor Vailar with me in chambers. Everyone else is with me online and we do have all members of the committee present to which I’m looking to them for disclosures of pecuniary interest. The committee members put their screens on just for a quorum check and to disclosures of pecuniary interest.

Okay, seeing no disclosures of pecuniary interest, we’ll move on to the consent items. Please note that there is the added agenda today for items coming up later. So on consent, we have items 2.1 through to 2.6, looking to committee to see if they would like anything pulled separate. Okay, seeing none so far, looking for a mover and a second order of consent items moved by Councillor van Holst, seconded by Councillor van Merbergen, looking to committee for any questions of items 2.1 through to 2.6, and I will start my speakers list with Councillor van Holst, followed by Councillor van Merbergen.

Please proceed. Thank you, Madam Chair. So I wanted to make a comment about a couple of items. First 2.2, congratulations for a 100% mark on the inspection for the drinking water system.

Great job. That’s not the first time that’s happened, but it’s great to see that we’ve got consistently consistent excellence in that system. And 2.3, I was really impressed with the energy savings, some staggering savings there. And so I’m just going to follow up and get a little more details.

I think that is largely because we’re moving to a, to incinerating substances that have less water in them. So we’ve got an improved dewatering process. And of course, if you want to incinerate something, the first thing you’ve got to do is boil off the water essentially. And of course, that takes a lot of energy.

So if you put a pot of water on the stove and try to boil it all off, that takes quite a while. So just confirming with the staff that that’s actually the source of the savings or a large portion of it. Thank you for that. Ms.

Ramalu, can you please speak to item 2.3 as it was an excellent report? Thank you. Absolutely. So through the chair, yes, that is one of the sources of energy savings.

We do have a number noted in the report that it, but that is a significant one, definitely. And you do have the mechanism there, right? Follow up, counselor? Okay.

Well, that’s, that’s excellent. I can say this is great work. And I think many people will be pleased about this. It’s great for the green, great for the bottom line.

And, and so I offer my thanks. Thank you. Your worship just for, you know, items 2.1 and 2.1, all consent items are on the floor. And next to my speakers list is counselor Van Merbergen.

Thank you, chair. I wanted to speak to 2.5, which has to do with the expansion, the widening of Southdale Road, Southdale Road, Road West, as well as the upcoming roundabout at Colonel Talbot in Southdale. This is indeed a good news story, a great day for Southwest London. Anyone who lives or has to travel through that quadrant knows how congested that 2 lane road, which carries such significant traffic is considering the fact that there’s so much development, which is not only ongoing as we speak, but is proposed.

This is absolute necessity. So again, a great day. We can look forward to construction starting. It looks like 2022, this construction season from Pine Valley to Boston with Farnham.

And then onwards after that and 2024 to the roundabout at Colonel Talbot, this will bring much needed relief to the residents in the Southwest. So thank you, Madam Chair. Thank you, looking for further speakers and welcome to counselor Lewis and counselor Hill here as well today as they’ve joined us virtually. Okay, last call for questions for all consent items through 2.1 through to 2.6.

Seeing as it’s been moved and seconded, I will call the question. Using the vote, the motion carries 6 to 0. Schedule items. We are right on time.

Public participation meetings for amendments to consolidate fees and charges by law for Dundas Street vendor pilot program. The staff is with us today to answer any questions. I would need a mover and a seconder to open the public participation meeting moved by counselor Van Holsk, seconded by Mayor Holder, opening the vote. Closing the vote, the motion carries 6 to 0.

Coming to committee room 5 to make sure that we’ve had no unanticipated walk-ins that would be joining us today. Chair, we don’t have any participants in committee room 5 or online. Okay, and we have no one in the gallery with us today either. So looking for a motion to close the public participation meeting moved by counselor Van Merbergen, seconded by Mayor Holder.

And we do have a communication on the added today for someone who did send in their comments in advance. So thank you to them for that and calling the question. Closing the vote, the motion carries 6 to 0. This is an exciting pilot project that’s proposed, looking to committee to see if there’s questions or comments or if they would like staff to give an overview or additional information.

Hey, I will start the speaker’s list with counselor 5-malar followed by counselor Van Holsk. Thank you, Chair, and through you, wondering to staff if they could speak a little bit on the engagement that was done with the bricks and mortar businesses that were on Dundas. I think the report says that they’re highly supportive, but I wonder if we can just get some comments on that, please. Okay, to staff.

Chair, it’s Jim Young speaking. Our core area programs manager Ryan Craven went around to individual businesses in formulating the proposed vendor program in the fee. It was warmly received by many of the businesses. It wasn’t unanimous as none of these things ever are.

The main takeaway from the engagement of the businesses were that understanding that this is a pilot project, and it’s going to be reviewed at the end of the pilot period this year. We’ll know whether it continues or it doesn’t, what information is gleaned by being able to pilot it. Follow-up counselor? No, thank you very much for that response.

Okay, I’ll go to Council. I’m going to do committee first, but I do see counselor Lewis will pose a question once committee is done. So Councilor Van Holst. Thank you.

So I was pleased that we’re charging by the quarter. I think that’s great for some vendors who, for instance, might be selling Christmas decorations or garden seeds. They would only want to be there for part of the year. So it’s good that we split that up.

I know there’s other programs that we have where I’ve had complaints that I only needed a portion of this. So I think we’re on top of it there. I had a chance to see the vendors out there last year, and I thought it was great. And I’m also thrilled that the bricks and mortar people like it as well.

So these are, I think these are great programs. It’s going to be fun to see what what comes of them. Thank you. Absolutely.

Councilor Lewis, welcome, please proceed. Thank you, Madam Chair. I appreciate you acknowledging being giving me an opportunity to speak to this at your committee. I’m going to echo the comments that have already been made.

I think they’re good comments and they’re quite valid. Councilor Van Holst is quite right that the quarterly approach makes a lot of sense. I will say that I have heard a sign from the communication on the agenda. I have heard from a couple of downtown merchants who are a bit concerned about the fee being solo and the potential to have to compete with pop-up vendors when they’re paying much higher costs to be brick and mortar shops.

So I think it’s really relevant to hear through Mr. Angela, Mr. Craven, that the bricks and mortar support is not unanimous on this, but I think everybody’s interested in giving it a try. And that’s a good thing.

As we’re coming out of COVID in particular, the opportunity to activate Dundas Place in this way I think has some real pluses. Certainly I’m looking forward to the review at the end because I do have some concerns that the fees are just being done as an administrative fee that there’s no sort of cost recovery. I noted the report that the day-to-day management sort of things will be covered by the ambassador program for this point, but I’m going to be interested to see if this requires more street cleaning, more garbage collection, that kind of thing as well because that’s certainly a potential for us operationally. So I guess I want to share that I’m cautiously optimistic about this, and I think that we’ll have to take a look at how it performs in its first year and then perhaps make some tweaks to and along the way.

But this is the kind of thing that I think offers some opportunity to hopefully, in the long run, attract some long-term tenants to spaces on Dundas Place when they see that there can actually be a market for the type of business they’re operating in the downtown course. So just wanted to share those thoughts. I’ll be supportive of this at council. It’s not without some concerns, but I think in overall as a pilot project it’s well set up and we’ll see how it goes from there.

Thank you, Councillor, for joining us in your comments today. Mayor Holder. Thank you very much. I’m mindful, I appreciate this chair.

I’m mindful of a note that’s in our package from Mr. Bill Robinson from Target High-Fi and he makes reference to the kinds of goods that can be sold. And this is kind of piggyback to Councillor Lewis’ comments where they pay good taxes to be, where they are at Dundas Street. So my practical question is, perhaps through you to Mr.

Yanchula, what’s the thought of the types of businesses that might well be setting up shop on Dundas Place for that period? Are there any restrictions or how will that work exactly, please? Thank you for that, staff. So Mr.

Craven will be accepting applications and then reviewing them for best fits through what is on the street and what the season is. So if I can link it back to what Councillor Van Hulse had, for an example, in certain seasons of the year there will be things that only are appropriate and those would be first choice. It is, after all, a curated program. It’s meant to complement what’s there, not compete with what’s there.

And so there are some times, though, where in economic development theory clusters of like products reinforce everybody. So sometimes the rising tide lifts all the boats. These are the things that we are going to experiment with through the pilot period to see where we go too far and when we’re contacting the different businesses for saying, okay, this is going to be set up in front of 179 Dundas, making sure that we have buy-in because we want it to reinforce the image of Dundas place and not create new problems that we don’t need. Well, Chair, through you, I’m not always sure that I agree that kind attracts kind.

I mean, it does when you think of the golden mile with people looking for a vehicle and makes easier access for those people compete at a fair and consistent level in terms of outlay. And I’m talking about people that pay taxes, that pay staff, and staff is just the direct wage cost, but the ancillary costs that are associated with that. And when it comes to things like food products, the health concerns, we know that the health unit is very vigorous and it’s vetting process. And I speak from experience coming from a family that has food products and the health unit is very vigorous in their ensuring that everything from safety notices, safety equipment, sinks, and the like.

And I guess if there’s food product associated with that as an example, and it’s only one example, will the same kinds of three to two, again, perhaps Mr. Angelo, will the same kinds of health and safety considerations be there, or will health unit be as vigorous with Dundas place, which I quite love the spirit of of of attracting people downtown more. But will that will that those same kinds of standards be in place, staff, through the chair? Yes, Mr.

Mayor, those will be in place foods will not be part of the Dundas place food prepared foods foods that you can walk away and eat on the spot. Those are government through the refreshment vehicle license program. This is to permit more goods and services. I would say I don’t know what the services would be actually, but certainly it is meant to comply with all the applicable standards.

What we’re doing here is trying to peg fee for interesting objects. I’ll call it at this moment. We have to see what comes in before we kind of know who’s interested. Chair, I appreciate that.

And the fact that mystery and truly indicated that there would be some form of vetting process gives me some comfort. So I’ll support the certainty committee. Thank you. Thank you for those comments looking to visiting counselors or committee for any further questions or comments.

Okay, then I would need a mover and a seconder to have this bylaw introduced at municipal council moved by councilor 5 melar, seconded by councilor Van Holst calling the question. Closing the vote, the motion carries six to zero. That concludes our scheduled items. Under items for direction today, we have seven.

I will ask that we deal with 4.1 through to 4.3 together as they are all related in companion reports for 4.2 and 4.3. So I would do look for a mover and a seconder and then I would go to Ms. Dan for her overview of all those free items moved by councilor Van Holst, seconded by Mayor Holder. Hey, the items on the floor, Ms.

Dan, can you please present items 4.1 and then how 4.2 and 4.3 relate to your reports. Thank you. Thank you. Good afternoon and through the chair, my name is Jenny Dan and I’m the director of construction and infrastructure services.

I’d like to thank you for the opportunity to provide a brief introduction for this year’s annual Renew London report which outlines the city’s successes and lessons learned from the 2021 construction program. The report also previews the important work that’s planned for 2022. It flags potential risks and some of the measures that we’re taking to mitigate those risks. As the report notes, last year the city managed approximately 100 million in infrastructure construction projects.

This included projects that enhanced road safety, improved traffic flow for all road users and helped maintain our infrastructure in a good state of repair. And while 2021 was a busy and challenging year, I’m pleased to share that the vast majority of construction projects were done on time and on budget. As we’ve outlined in the companion reports, items 4.2 through 4.3 and 4.4 actually, staff are seeking contract increases of 1.68 million combined to address budget pressures on a handful of specific 2021 projects. However, it’s important to note that 2021’s $100 million construction program will still come in under budget overall due to unused contingencies.

As a general rule, the city allocates 10% contingency on our construction projects and at the end of the year, any unused contingency funds get rolled back into programs to support renewal work for the following year. And this year is going to be a very active construction season. In 2022, it’s on track to be the city of London’s largest construction season in terms of both the number of projects and the value of work. After a $100 million program in 2021, we’re set to deliver $190 million in construction this year.

This year’s budgets will invest in supporting the city’s growing population needs, making improvements to aging infrastructure and expanding London’s active transportation network. A full listing of the 2022 projects has been plotted out on a map and posted to the city’s website with information online for all projects. The renew report also identifies the top 10 projects for 2022 based on criteria like the scope of work, the duration of construction, and impacts on road users. We’ve packaged the top 10 projects together into a handy story map tool that shows where these important projects are happening as visuals to help illustrate the improvements that are coming and outlines the benefits for each project.

All of this information can be viewed at london.ca/construction. Over the last two years, COVID-19 global supply chain interruptions, inflationary pressures, and labor shortages have impacted many sectors and municipal construction is no exception. There are several potential risks for the upcoming construction season that may impact projects and schedules, and while it’s challenging to predict how emerging pressures may affect 2022 construction, the team is focused on continuing to monitor industry trends and prioritize flexibility and mitigation strategies to respond. As london’s experiences larger and more complex construction seasons, the city continues to prioritize communications to ensure impacted businesses, residents, and property owners are informed before and during construction.

Work on several of the key 2022 projects is already underway and communication efforts on many of these projects are ramping up already. We know construction is challenging, especially in light of the impacts of the pandemic, and we also recognize that these projects aren’t happening in isolation, so it’s critical that our teams are talking to each other and working in tandem to coordinate how these projects roll out. Our goal as always is to minimize destruction and maintain access as much as possible while completing the construction efficiently. So as we begin rolling out what will be london’s busiest construction season yet, the team is in a good position to deliver these much needed infrastructure projects on time and on budget, and in a way that best supports businesses and residents who are impacted.

So with that, I’ll conclude my introduction to the renew report, and other than that, say that myself and my team are available to answer questions anytime about the work presented in today’s reports. Thank you. Thank you, Miss Dan. Looking to committee or visiting counselors for any questions or comments regarding items 4.1, 3 to 4.3, and I’ll start my speakers list with Mayor Holder.

Thanks very much. Through you, Chair and Miss Dan, I appreciate your comments with regard to using contingencies to deal with the overruns that you’ve indicated in 4, 2, and 3 with the contract price increases. I was very mindful of any potential risk exposure on the capital plan, and unless you say otherwise, this may be a backhanded question, but just to be confident that this will have no this has no risk exposure on the capital plan as has been prepared. Miss Dan, through the chair, with an annual construction program at this scale, you know, there’s always be the odd project that encounters some impacts that couldn’t be foreseen through the project.

And as I mentioned earlier, we are seeking some budget adjustments on these specific projects, but we were able to complete the overall program with some unspent funds remaining. Thank you for that, Chair. Thank you, Miss Dan. Councilor Vanholst.

Thank you, Madam Chair. So, I think first thing I’d like to do is ask if during the construction, we can put some more of those signs and perhaps work hard to get the motorists to use the zipper merge. I think that’s how it was described in the previous term, because I noticed that in many cases, motorists will turn 50 meters of one lane traffic into 500 meters of one lane traffic, because they think that it’s more polite to merge sooner than later. And sometimes they’re even reluctant to let people merge at the end when that when it’s that process that really helps the traffic move quicker.

So, I like it when we see those signs up that direct how to make that merging. And maybe we could even use our billboards to throw up a graphic on there and just remind people that that’s that’s the way to keep traffic flowing quickly. Miss Dan, the next thing I was looking at, this is 4.2, page 101 describes some that the infrastructure required some non-typical supplies and some specialized sub trades. And I wondered if you could through the chair just elucidate on that a little bit.

Hey, Miss Dan, as through the chair, we have been seeing that the complexity of our transportation projects has been increasing. More and more, we’re needing to align multiple tasks as part of a single project. We’re trying to align our renewal needs to get in and get everything fixed at the same time. Utility coordination is also a really important part of that.

But we’re also seeing some new innovative design elements that often require different specialized sub trades to come in. And there’s a lot of coordination that’s involved in that. And so those are some of the things that are also contributing to both budget and schedule pressures for our projects. Councilor?

Okay, thank you. I think that was that was clear in the report, but I wonder what those non, could you give me an example of a non-typical supply or what a specialized sub trade might be doing? That’s different than what we usually see. Miss Dan, through the chair, one of those would be some of the work that we do with utility coordination, having to bring in specialized sub trades that are qualified to be able to work in certain utility areas with certain utility infrastructure.

Also some of the work that we have been doing to bring in new elements in our streets where, you know, as we move forward with additional infrastructure along for cycling pedestrians to manage all modes of traffic, involve specialized pavement markings and other sorts of elements that, again, we have to coordinate a lot of sub trades to be able to have that all come together at the end of a project. Council, are you satisfied? Yes, thank you. And one final question about these items.

There were some cost increases, and I noticed a couple of those were done in-house the design. So I’ve wondered what we might have gleaned from these experiences that might allow us to predict costs with greater accuracy in the future. Miss Dan? Yes, there was a couple of the projects where they saw overlapping factors.

There’s a number of factors influencing the cost increase. In some cases, it was contract schedule extension. We had a project that ended up being extended over two construction seasons. We also saw some delays related to utility locates.

So in one project, on both years, saw multiple week delays getting started waiting for locating our underground utilities before we could start digging. We also did some coordinated work where we added in some additional infrastructure that it made the most sense and was the most cost effective way to be able to address that work while we already had a contractor engaged at competitive unit prices. Councilor Van Host? Okay, thank you.

Do we think that we might need to come up with ways to mitigate the delays in locates? Miss Dan? Yes, there’s actually several mitigations that we’ve already put in place to try to address a number of the pressures we’re anticipating for 2022. Locates is one of those.

One of the things that we’ve been doing is working with the industry to move to a dedicated locate system for our city projects. So locate requests would still go through the one-call program like everybody we have to call before we dig. But from that port, it’s sent over to be direct supplied and have a higher level of service through our locate service provider so that those projects get first service and you can do a just-in-time delivery on locates which makes them be more nimble as they go forward. So it’s a trial for this year.

We’re looking forward to see if that can help improve some of the delays that we’ve seen on those projects. Some other mitigations we’ve done this year is really working to get all of our larger tenders out as early as possible. Our three biggest tenders, the one three biggest, but the two RT projects in the Victoria Bridge were all tendered before the end of last year to make sure that we could get out at the start of the season. We’re also working to expedite the process for getting contract documents executed once the low bid is confirmed, which everything that we’re doing is really to try to buy back as much time as we can for the contractor at the start of the project.

Councillor Vanholst. And Ms. Dan, I appreciate the innovations and thank you Madam Chair. That concludes my questions.

Thank you. Ms. Dan, I don’t know if you would like to do this opportunity to circle back to one of the Councillor Vanholst’s earlier comments about just traffic mitigation and education of the public as we are coming into construction season of what we can anticipate for Londoners. Absolutely.

Thank you through the chair. We do a lot of work to try to find ways to mitigate impacts for construction for all modes of people that travel in and around town and especially in the core. We have a lot of work happening in the core this year. We do use enhanced signage and around the core to make sure that people can easily find their way and navigate through construction.

Another thing that we like to do is encourage again those communications. And so we want to make sure that if something is happening in someone’s neighborhood, they know about it and they know how to get around it. So we’ll be providing timely updates on any road closures and traffic impacts through service announcements through the media and on the city’s website. For anybody that lives or works downtown, we strongly recommend following the city on social media because any of those traffic interruptions will be posted there.

And then if you’re one of the folks that is directly impacted by a project, you can visit the project website and sign up for emails where you can get regular email updates from the project team directly. That’s wonderful. Thank you so much. I know I’ve enjoyed our social media posts as sometimes I drive into it and I remember that I’m actually the one who approved the traffic that I am sitting in at that moment.

So thank you for what we do for that. Looking to final questions or comments from committee, Councillor Helmer. Thank you. I appreciate the reports and I think it’s a good example of why we are pretty careful with the capital budgets and building into disease.

For this exact problem, sometimes you do run into issues. The example of Lauren Av and English, the reconstruction there and running into the water issues, you know, that was quite disruptive to the overall schedule, but obviously caused a lot of extra work that needed to be done. And, you know, we’re going to have to increase the budget for that particular project, but I’m glad that some of the other ones came a bit under. I do think given the number of issues that are identified in this sort of retrospective report around 2021, looking ahead at 2022, you know, the contingency budgets that we have been traditionally budgeting for, we may be running out of room in terms of being able to buffer those kinds of pressures as we see the sort of inflationary pressures on construction outpacing what’s in the contingency budgets, right?

So that’s going to be, we had some room last year. I don’t think we’re going to have so much room next year or the year after that. But I do want to say a lot of these projects in 2021 were in Ward 4. You look over the list, you’re like, wow, that’s a lot of projects in the one ward.

And quite disruptive, honestly, like people did a really good job, but they were major projects, you know, the Mornington one in the residential area, the commercial street in Dundas, the bike lanes and bridges on both sides of hybrid, you know, really important projects. People are happy to see them in the rear view. And, you know, there’s some touch up work that needs to be done in a couple of these projects, but really important that we got them done. I thought the contractors in particular and the city staff working on those projects did a great job trying to make them as smooth as possible, you know, the bumps along the road for sure, but really important and glad to have especially Dundas Street finished and, you know, wrap it up now and we’ll have decades of no more construction on that section.

And that people really appreciate that, I think. So thanks very much for all three of those reports and the work on the projects. Thank you. Saying no further questions or comments in person or on the screen, I am calling the question.

I was like the both the motion carries six to zero. Item 4.4, the Metamora stormwater outfall replacement contract award increase, looking for a movement or a seconder to put this one on the floor, moved by Mayor Holder, seconded by Councillor Fife-Milar, looking to committee or visiting Councillors to see if there’s any questions or comments in regards to this one. Seeing none, calling the question. I’m closing the vote.

The motion carries six to zero. Thank you. Item 4.5, the contract award tender for the Adelaide Street North CPR under past project. It’s a regular result.

Mr. McCray has joined us today with a preamble. Mr. McCray, could you give your overview and then we’ll move on to move on a seconder?

Chair, we appreciate that. This report recommends the award of a tender and contract administration for the Adelaide under past. It’s a notable report given the scope and complexity of the project and the financing associated with the award. This is a city building project that will create a new underpass, great separation with elevated multi-use pathways, permanent utility corridor on the east side of Adelaide Street, new storm and groundwater management infrastructure and improved streetscaping elements.

It’s an economic development project that will increase the safety and reliability of the corridor for people and goods to improve connections between neighbourhoods and will provide complete streets amenities and active transportation infrastructure. During the 2018 budget process, council moved the project timing forward a decade and a 558.3 million project account was established based on the environmental assessment project estimate available at the time. So since 2019, design, property acquisition, utility relocations and community consultations have been ongoing. Railway negotiations have occurred resulting in a rail contribution of 8.75 million and 11.1 million of federal and provincial funding was also secured via the Investing in Canada infrastructure program for the active transportation components.

The construction procurement process for the project began in April of last year with a pre-qualification followed by a tender in November. The results of the procurement process identify a total cost to complete the project of 87.6 million requiring an additional 29.1 million in city funding. Due to its unique aspects, this project is particularly prone to the current cost inflation that has become apparent just recently due to the project’s unique aspects. The primary items contributing to the cost escalation are identified in the report and the top three contributors are current volatility in the price of structural steel, labor shortages and supply chain disruptions that are creating rapid construction cost escalation across all items and the complex solution required to manage subsurface groundwater at this site that requires a specialized contractor to install.

Financing solution to support the completion of the project is outlined in the report and evolves the deferral of two transportation capital projects along with additional debt financing. So in conclusion, the procurement process has identified a competent team to complete the project at a competitive cost. The subject to your approval, this two-year capital construction project would commence this spring and extend into 2024. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. McCrae, looking for a mover and a seconder to put this item on the floor, moved by Councillor Helmer, seconded by Councillor Vaiff Mallar, and I’m opening my speaker’s list. I will start with Mayor Holder and then Councillor Van Merbergen. Thanks very much and Mr.

McCrae, thank you for your detailed report. A couple of quick things first. For the benefit of everyone, what are the two transportation projects that will be deferred as a result of trying to find a way to make this work financially, please? Mr.

McCrae. Yes, through the chair, we look through the transportation capital program to look for projects that have flexibility in their schedule and can accommodate some deferral of a few years. So we’ve identified two projects, one of which is the renewal of the concrete pavement on the freeway section of Highbury Avenue between Hamilton Road and Highway 401. So this is a large project that we’re saving for.

It’s a big infrastructure need and it continues to be on the radar. However, we feel that a deferral of a few years, three to five years, is manageable in that as we monitor the deterioration of that concrete pavement, we know that it’s approaching the end of its service life, but it is very predictable and slow in its deterioration. So the management of that asset, while it will be a lower level of service due to the deferral, it is a low risk and we can manage that with monitoring and patching is necessary. The second project is an improvement to Southdale Road, West and Wekerson Road.

So around the intersection of those two roads, the project is primarily for operational improvements, i.e. to flatten the profile on Southdale Road to improve sightlines. It will also provide sidewalks and bicycle lanes and a multi-use path connection. Upon, you know, the project is still intended to proceed, but the recommendation is to create capacity for in the current year by deferring it into the upcoming development charge background study process to set a new near-term timing for it.

And this recognizes that while the project should proceed, there is some flexibility in the schedule and that it connects developing areas, but there’s no development directly adjacent to it, and some flexibility is possible there in the timing of those improvements. Mayor Holder? Yes, thank you, Chair. Again, back through you, Mr.

McCray. I appreciate that information. That’s helpful to know. The separate question I’ve got relates to all the other projects as well, relating to ICIP.

I won’t lie, I was surprised whether it’s 29.1 or 29.3 as per the report overrun, and you’ve explained the reasons why. Can we anticipate that the other projects that were approved by Council will experience the same pressures, and to what extent will that impact us in terms of other projects going forward? Thank you, Mr. McCray.

Or, Ms. Share, or both? I’m happy to respond. We carefully monitor the impacts to our capital programs, and Ms.

Dan got into that a bit in her recent words. While we monitor them, for this specific project, a lot has changed since the project budget was established in 2018, and it is particularly prone to some of the current economic factors due to the unique nature of the project, and so the specialized contractors, the unique elements like the structural steel, for instance, the fluctuation in the commodity price for that, are factors that really disproportionately affected this project and the unique nature of it, and these kind of complex projects like grade separations, there tends not to be a lot of them underway across the province at any given time. So, the required contractors to build them tend to be under pressure with more under pressure with respect to those supply chain and labor shortage pressures. So, we are, to your point, we are carefully monitoring current conditions across all projects, or I would suggest that this project due to its unique nature and scope is an anomaly within the entire capital program, and more prone to the pressures that were currently seen.

Mayor Holder. Thank you, Chair. Thank you, Mr. McCrae.

Look, I don’t think there’s anyone in council that wouldn’t recognize the importance of this project, and I think when done, well, right now, it’s probably like Dundas Street and Ward 4, where there’s some challenges associated with short-term inconvenience, but I think when done, it will be a very significant contribution to traffic flow and people flow through the center part of the city. Having said that, I’m mindful, Ms. Dan gave us very clear rationale for the, or at least explanations rationale for the overruns, as you have here with this project, and would I be right to imagine that the other projects that have been improved will have, if not, this traumatic and impact have cost overruns, are you at the point where you’ve projected what that might look like just to give us as councilors some sense of what to anticipate with the other projects? I’m talking about the projects approved through ICIP at this point.

Mr. McCrae. The project monitoring has not to date identified dramatic escalations in the ICIP projects. However, we do continue to monitor, and as necessary, if projects that exceedances are identified, they’ll certainly will be brought to the attention of councils through budget amendment and business case updates as necessary.

Mayor Holder. So, well, Chair, thank you, and thank you, Mr. McCrae. Look, I guess it’s as good as it gets in some circumstances.

I’m not anticipating that labor costs or costs of materials are going to go down anytime soon, and to the extent that this was a surprise, I feel we have to proceed with this, but I can anticipate that the other projects may have some of those pressures, if not to this financial degree, certainly will have some. So, to the extent that we’re able to monitor, maybe buy futures and steal, I don’t know, but whatever it will take to help mitigate some of those costs will be helpful because I know this council in good faith, when they approved the 10 projects that were in place, look, no one’s naive, we could have anticipated there may be some overruns. This is not insignificant, and I wish you well in this planning. It’s these are important projects that we’ve approved as a council, and I’m mindful that the federal and provincial government don’t come back in for cost overruns and help support those differences, so it’s all on us and trying to be sensitive to taxpayers.

So, your deferral of some projects from as long as from a safety standpoint, which I’m confident you’ve said you’ve been monitoring, will be the issue that I think will always pay mine to, but I appreciate the report you’ve given so far. Thank you. Thank you, Mayor Holder. Councilor Van Merbergen.

Thank you, Chair. And I want to thank Mr. McCrae for that fulsome verbal report on what amounts to a real eye opener in terms of 50% ballooned budget on this particular project. It goes without saying though that this project, the underpass on Adelaide, is absolutely critical to the entire city.

We’ve been waiting years for this to go ahead and the majority of Londoners would agree with that, so it is vitally important to, as was stated earlier, economic development, transportation flows, etc. And I do think while it is an eye opener, it was originally set what in today’s world is some time ago, this budget, and most of these factors appear to be external. I believe the way staff have approached this in terms of trying to mitigate this increase in budget makes a lot of sense, and I give them credit for that. Specifically, I’d like to speak to Southdale Road.

The project, which is being put on hold for the time being, is on the extreme western end close to West L. Born. I think it’s intelligent and makes sense that we focus coming immediately off West, our wonderland, heading West, and expanding in that vein, and then in a few years being able to perhaps do the work that’s necessary by Wickers and West L. Born.

So again, I think this makes sense on the whole. It is an eye opener in terms of the cost or the ballooning budget, but I think it’s being handled in an intelligent smart way. So thank you. Councilor Vanholst.

Yes, thank you, Madam Chair, and through you to Mr. McCray. The project, as has been said, is considered kind of a mission critical one for London, and people are, as the mayor suggested, going to be thrilled when it’s completed. Previous projects that reported some increases did so because there was a delay in the completion of the project.

So I’m wondering how confident we are on the timelines for this one. Mr. McCray. The procurement process for this project was thorough and that we initiated an initial pre-qualification process, and that was because of the complexity to build the project.

So we’re a competent contractor that can deliver this project to completion. Obviously, there is unknowns along with any construction project, and we’ve included a substantial contingency amount of $5.5 million in this contract to deal with that. And as it relates specifically to schedule, a lot of rigor has gone into the development of that. We, upon tender award, will obviously review that with the contractor and highlight critical path items so that we can proactively address them, and also dovetailing into the standards or your comments, right?

And is that applying some of those solutions that are being developed for other projects and certainly apply them to this one? Thank you, Councillor Van Holst. Are you satisfied? Yes, thank you, Madam Chair.

Thank you, Councillor Lewis. Thank you, Madam Chair. I think everybody agrees, and it’s been said already. So I won’t be later at the point.

This project has to go ahead. It’s absolutely critical to the transportation future of the city. So obviously, I’m not happy with the numbers, and I will say I’m not happy that the library of our regeneration is going to have to be put down the road a little bit. That is a key, key entry point into the east end of the city from Highway 4.1 for traffic coming into the city, commuters, families coming in from Point South, from St.

Thomas. It’s going to be a key access point as well. It’s going to run through the East London Lake Rapid Transline. I know we’re talking about an area south of that, but the quality of that road matters for people coming in and out of the city doing business.

And with much of the industrial part of the city being located in the east end, it’s a heavy truck use road as well. Certainly, the VMP has taken some of that load off, but it hasn’t removed all of it. So I’m not thrilled with it, but I recognize the reality of the budget and apparently, so does my cap. But I hope that we continue to prioritize that primary average rule, recognizing that budgets are a thing, and that it’s considered really high on the list to get moving when we can fund it properly.

And I see Mr. Ricari nodding and acknowledging that, and I just have to emphasize it, because it feels so often that some of these projects were told are coming and coming. And I think, on the other hand, people who use either app might appreciate a little bit of a break since we had a rather significant period of time with construction on the winning bridge renewal. And of course, that high bearing Hamilton Road intersection is going to need some significant renewal.

I think that’s down the road in about 2029 or 2030, if memory serves correctly. So there’s work to be done there. So I hope that when we’re looking at that particular project being delayed, we’re considering how that’s going to play into the renewal of that key intersection at Hamilton and Highbury as well. But certainly, the Adelaide Street underpass has to happen.

And this will have my support. Obviously none of us are happy about this price increase, but if this had been done 30 years ago, it would have been much cheaper. And unfortunately, that didn’t happen. So it’s up to our council to move it forward.

Thank you, Councillor Lewis. Looking for any further questions or comments, Councillor Helmer. Thank you. I’m certainly glad to see the project going ahead and people recognizing the need for the Great Separation.

I’m sure because of the frequency everybody has been involved in this call has been blocked by a train at this great crossing. Sometimes for 20, 25 minutes, it just goes on and on and on. And it’s absolutely maddening for people who end up being blocked whether they’re walking or trying to bike through or in a car waiting. And it just paralyzes activity in the city.

Every time there’s a blockage, it’s not particularly safe. And the Great Separation is going to finally solve that problem. So I’m glad to see it finally get to this point. I know we prioritized it back in 2016 of the environmental assessment underway, really tried to accelerate it, bring it forward a decade in the capital plan.

You can imagine if we’d left it where it is, how expensive it would be 10 or 12 years from now to be working on this project. So I know that it’s gone up in cost, but it’ll never be cheaper than it is now to do this project and frankly look at three bids. If we’d only have the third bid, we’d be looking at $30 million more from the third highest or third lowest bid that we received. So I know it’s not fun to deal with project budget increases like this.

I think the project is necessary, it’s going to really resolve a major longstanding problem. I think Councillor Lewis’ point about delay. And it’s not just delay, it’s delay caused by lack of ambition in terms of the capital program. And we’ve gone through periods of time where we’ve taken on fewer capital projects and been less ambitious in terms of what we’re going to do both in terms of growth projects, lifecycle replacement.

Sometimes that shows up in deteriorating assets, right? We’re not replacing things as quickly as we should be. And we went through a period where we really were spending a lot less on the capital budget than we should have been then thinking back like three, four terms ago. That was a period where there was a lot less spending on capital.

Like, you know, the capital budget would be like $56 million or something, the tax supported side. Now it’s more than double that. And we’re doing a lot more in terms of capital projects, we’re taking on a lot more projects. And we’re able to do that because the province and the federal government are supporting those things in a way that they weren’t back then.

And I actually think we’re in a much better place now. And you know, taking on this project, the way that it’s been taken on now, I think is the most cost effective way to do it. I think we have to maintain this level of ambition in terms of the capital program. We got a lot of needs all throughout the community.

And the sooner we get these things done, the better. Sometimes it’s really easy to defer and put things off and do them later. And then bang, you get hit with something like this where really significantly more expensive. So projects like that, Northern widening of Werncliffe, where we finally made the bridge wider, the rail bridge there.

A couple of years ago, that was a really important project to get done. You imagine if we didn’t get that done when we did, and it was coming up now, we’d have the same kind of price increases on that, because it’s the same kind of problem, structural steel, things like that. So I’m really, I’m really glad that there’s support to move ahead. I know deferring these projects is not a great, but that’s the value in having a 10-year capital plan, long-range planning, careful maintenance of the assets and monitoring of what the condition of those things are.

We do have some flexibility built in, and I’m glad to see us making the use of it now to make sure this project doesn’t have to delay anymore. Because if we tendered it next year, I think we’d just be looking at an even bigger number. The last thing I want to say is, I think sometimes we miss the fact that we do the real estate part, land acquisition early on in these projects when we know exactly what we need after the environmental assessment’s done. And that’s an area where we’ve really benefited from early action, and it’s something we need to keep doing, which is buying up the properties that are needed in advance of the actual construction of the projects.

We could have been on the hook for a lot more land acquisition costs on this project. We have a lot more land acquisition to do for a number of other projects, and I think we have to maintain that same kind of aggressive approach that real estate services is taken, which is trying to acquire those properties in the open market as early as possible once we know we’re going ahead with the project, because it can save us a lot of money in the long run to take that approach. So I appreciate the report and the comments from my colleagues in particular. Thank you.

Looking for last call for questions or comments. Okay, call the question on item 4.5. Housing the motion carries 6-0. Point 6, contract award tender for South Dale Road West improvements, phase 1, looking to committee for a mover and a seconder.

Moved by Councillor 5-Milar, seconded by Councillor Van Holst, looking to committee for questions or comments. I will start with Councillor Vaymer, Bergen. Well, thank you, Chair. This dovetails with what I spoke to earlier on 2.5.

So again, this is the awarding of the contract for the widening of South Dale Road from just west of Wonderland down to Bostwick, or a little bit past Bostwick Farnham, crucially needed, as I stated earlier, this is a great day for the southwest, and I wholeheartedly will be supporting this. Thank you. Thank you. Looking to committee for any further questions or comments, saying none, calling the question.

Closing the vote, the motion carries 6-0. If you are a final item as item 4.7, being asking for report on downtown road closures, it’s a letter in your package submitted by Councillor Van Holst. I will begin with Councillor Van Holst to introduce his motion, then we will look for a mover and a seconder. Thank you, Madam Chair.

So, of course, this has got to do with the non-construction road closures we’ve seen in the past few weeks. I’ll point out that in the municipal act, one of the roles of Council on 22.4-D1 says that we’re to ensure the accountability and transparency of the operations of the municipality, including the activities of the senior management of the municipality. So, in a business owner complains that the street was closed, then we can’t just not know about that. So, I’m not sure I like the wording of the motion, but it is clear that that’s all I need in a report to feel that we’ve covered that obligation of ours.

So, I’ll put that on the floor, just asking staff report back to our committee regarding the justifications and costs of the recent non-construction related street closures. Thank you. So, Councillor Van Holst has moved his motion that he’s read out to you looking to committee to see if there is a seconder. Seeing none, I’ll do a last call as we have a mover and no seconder.

Hey, sorry, Councillor, there is no seconder for your motion. Mayor Holder. Thank you, Chair. I’d like to move that we receive the report and take no action.

Okay, moved by Mayor Holder for receive the communication with a take no action. Looking for a seconder, I will second that. Looking to committee for a question or comments, Councillor Van Holst. Thank you, Madam Chair.

With the take no action added to this, I’ll vote against it. I do think we have an obligation to look into that. In the short term, I think there’s long term ways to deal with some of these challenges as well. But I’ll try and bring those forward to the appropriate committee.

But I do think it’s our responsibility to inquire about these things. Whether they came to us in a public report or one that was in camera, I don’t know why, for instance, Richmond Street would have been closed. So that was my concern. And I know there was complaints about funds lost by business owners due to that.

So I’ll leave it out. I’ll vote against that for that reason. And I may bring it forward again at council. If this doesn’t pass, then of course, I’ll just move that we receive the communication.

Thank you. Thank you. Last call for any questions or comments? Seeing none, calling the question.

Housing to vote the motion carries five to one. Thank you. That concludes our items for direction. Moving on to section five, being our deferred matters and additional business.

As per your added, we do have a 5.1 and a 5.2. 5.2 has been added. And it’s the Kenmore Place sidewalk petition. There is a petition in the clerk’s office with 25 signatures.

They had requested, just for committee’s interest, a delegation status today. But they are unable to attend with us today. So that delegation status is no longer pertinent to today’s meeting. Councillor Helmer, as I believe item 5.2 is your award?

Yeah, I wanted to move 5.1 because I think it’s first having to receive the deferred matters list. And then I do have some comments about 5.2. And I’d like to move motion to receive that and then also add a being noted clause on there. I’ll give colleagues some context for what’s going on in terms of that location after we’re dealt with the deferred matters list.

Perfect. So we have a mover for what we’ll do with them separate to keep it nice and clean today. So 5.1 is moved by Councillor Helmer, seconded by Mayor Holder. Any questions or comments strictly on the deferred matters list that’s before us today?

Seeing none, calling the question. Housing the vote, the motion carries 6-0. 2. I will move to Councillor Helmer for his overview of this item and the motion that he has in mind.

Hey, thanks colleagues. So this is a very good news situation, which is, I would tell you, the residents on the street at Kenmore that place had been after me for years to get a sidewalk installed on their street, you know, they went through the new sidewalk, warranted sidewalk process to identify that it was a priority. It’s especially a fellow who, you know, grandfather and his grand kids live on the street is down the road from where he lives. And he’s very, very keen to have a sidewalk there so that the kids can learn how to ride their bikes and walk on the street safely.

There’s a bunch of other families that have got young kids and they like the idea of having a sidewalk installed for the same reason. We have, of course, any time we’re putting in a sidewalk, you know, there’s impacts on the way things are now. And in this area, you know, we’re following the policy, which is, let’s find one side of the street where we can put a sidewalk, we’re not going to put sidewalks on both sides. There are some impacts, you know, one way or the other.

And you’ve got a situation where you have sort of an equal number of driveways, pretty much the same kind of setbacks and built form on both sides of the street. The street lights are on the east side. And so I think that’s why it’s preferred to have the sidewalk directly underneath the street lights, a little bit better from a lighting perspective, probably safer for people in terms of their perceptions of safety walking around at night. And so staff have identified the east side as the sort of preferred location.

I think there’s an opportunity to have a bit more discussion with the residents about is the east side the right location, or maybe it could have gone on the west. Some of the people who are probably the biggest proponents for a sidewalk on the street, they live on the west side, and they’d love to have it on the west side. So I think there’s there’s room to have some discussion about should be on the east, it should be on the west. And so I would, I would just move that we receive the communication from Mr.

Jameson, and having it be noted that staff will engage the residents further about whether the sidewalk should be on the east or the west. Hopefully their support for that I think is the best way of handling the issue that’s been raised by Mr. Jameson. He happens to live on the east side of the street and this one of the people who is I think is most directly impacted by the construction of the sidewalk given where his properties look at.

Thank you. The clerk is just entering that into eScribe and will let me know when we can refresh to review the wording, looking to committee for questions or comments in regards to this. I will start with Councillor van Merbergen. Thank you, Chair.

Perhaps Councillor Helmer could tell us approximately how many homes are on this particular street. I believe the communication said 28. Is that accurate? Okay, 28.

Okay, because to me, that’s crucial when looking at these projects because if there’s buy-in from the actual residents, then it behooves us as a city to take a serious look at this. But as we know, and many of us know, when there is no buy-in from residents, that’s where it becomes very problematic. So no, I’ll be supporting this motion. It seems reasonable.

Thanks. So Councillor van Merbergen, will you be seconding the motion then? Okay, so the clerk’s making note of that. Okay, the wording is ready.

If you wish to refresh your screens in eScribe, it should come up to you looking for questions or comments from any other committee or guest members. I would just have one question through to staff, just making sure that we are early enough in the process that this is not already slated for tender or contract, that this is still the ideal time to have these community conversations. Mr. McCrae?

Yes, Madam Chair, it is early enough. We, as Councillor Helmer pointed out, we did assess the project design based on a number of conditions on the street. But fortunately for this specific project, there is design flexibility. And so that the letter that was sent to the neighbourhood on February 11th invited further discussion between the staff, staff and the residents.

And so we’ve started to hear some of that feedback now. So we’re certainly amenable to doing some further engagement. It can make the project better. Now, if we listen to the residents, hear their concerns and explore the design a bit further.

So yes, if there is time, we’re certainly good with what’s being proposed. Perfect. Thank you. So for that, as it’s valuable information for us to know is to make an informed decision, looking for any other questions or other feedback.

Seeing none, it’s been moved and seconded and is available and ascribed. Call on the question. Seeing the vote, the motion carries six to zero. That discussion, that concludes the deferred matters and additional business that I am aware of.

Seeing nothing further from committee, I will look for a german and a mover and a seconder. Moved by Councillor Vanholst, seconded by Councillor van Merbergen. We can do a hand vote of all in favour. Motion carries six to zero.

Thank you everyone for your time today in discussion and I wish you a wonderful week.