May 24, 2023, at 12:00 PM

Original link

The meeting was called to order at 12:01 PM; it being noted that Councillor P. Van Meerbergen was in remote attendance.

1.   Disclosures of Pecuniary Interest

That it BE NOTED that no pecuniary interests were disclosed.

2.   Consent

Moved by P. Cuddy

Seconded by S. Trosow

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

Motion Passed (4 to 0)

2.1   6th Report of the Environmental Stewardship and Action Community Advisory Committee

2023-05-03 ESACAC REPORT

That the following actions be taken with respect to the 6th Report of the Environmental Stewardship and Action Community Advisory Committee, from the meeting held on May 3, 2023:

a)    that the Working Group comments related to the draft goldfish brochure, as appended to the Agenda, BE FORWARDED to the Civic Administration for review and consideration; and,

b)    clauses 1.1, 2.1, 3.1 and 3.2, BE RECEIVED.

2.2   Dingman Creek Pumping Station Consulting Fees Value Increase

2023-05-24 - Staff Report - (2.3) - Dingman Creek Pumping Station Consulting Fees Value Increase - Full

That, on the recommendation of the Deputy City Manager, Environment and Infrastructure, the following actions be taken with respect to the staff report dated May 24, 2023, related to the Dingman Creek Pumping Station Consulting Fees Value Increase:

a)   the value of the engineering consulting fees for Stantec Consulting Limited BE INCREASED by $463,025.15, including contingency (excluding HST), due to increased efforts related to the project extension;

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 Mayor and the City Clerk BE AUTHORIZED to execute any contract or other documents, if required, to give effect to these recommendations; and,

d)    the Civic Administration BE AUTHORIZED to undertake all the administrative acts that are necessary in connection with this project.(E03-2023)

2.3   Amendments to the Traffic and Parking By-law 

2023-05-24 - Staff Report - (2.4) - Amendments to the Traffic and Parking By-law

That, on the recommendation of the Deputy City Manager, Environment and Infrastructure, the proposed by-law, as appended to the staff report dated May 24, 2023, BE INTRODUCED at the Municipal Council meeting to be held on June 6, 2023, to amend By-law PS-114 entitled, “A by-law to regulate traffic and the parking of motor vehicles in the City of London”. (C01-2023)

2.4   2023 New Traffic and Pedestrian Signals and Pedestrian Crossovers

2023-05-24 - Staff Report - (2.5) - 2023 New Traffic and Pedestrian Signals and Pedestrian Crossovers

That, on the recommendation of the Deputy City Manager, Environment and Infrastructure, the following actions be taken with respect to the staff report dated May 24, 2023, related to the 2023 New Traffic and Pedestrian Signals and Pedestrian Crossover:

a)    the installation of the following traffic signals BE APPROVED:

i)    Bradley Avenue W at Wharncliffe Road S

ii)   Commissioners Road E at Chelton Road

iii)  Gainsborough Road at Coronation Drive (west intersection)

iv)  Gainsborough Road at Sherwood Forest Mall Driveway

v)   Hamilton Road at Clarke Road

vi)  Huron Street at Vesta Road

vii) King Street at Ontario Street

viii) South Street at Wellington Street

ix)  Sunningdale Road E at North Wenige Drive;

b)    the installation of the following pedestrian signals BE APPROVED:

i)    Fanshawe Park Road W at Foxwood Avenue

ii)   Hill Street at Adelaide Street N

iii)  Medway Park Road at Wonderland Road N

iv)  Morgan Avenue at Wharncliffe Road S

v)   Oxford Street W at Headley Gate

vi)  Springbank Drive at Kensal Park School (west driveway); and,

c)    the proposed by-law, as appended to the above-noted report, BE INTRODUCED at the Municipal Council meeting to be held on June 6, 2023, to amend By-law PS-114 entitled, “A by-law to regulate traffic and the parking of motor vehicles in the City of London”. (T10-2023)

2.5   Contract Award - Tender RFT-2023-016 Dingman Drive Improvements

2023-05-24 - Staff Report - (2.7) - Contract Award - Tender RFT - 2023-06-16 Dingman Drive Improvements - Full

That, on the recommendation of the Deputy City Manager, Environment and Infrastructure, the following actions be taken with respect to the staff report dated May 24, 2023, related to the Contract Award for the Dingman Drive Improvements (RFT-2023-016):

a)    the bid submitted by Bre-Ex Construction Inc., at its tendered price of $9,996,424.25 (excluding HST), BE ACCEPTED; it being noted that the bid submitted by Bre-Ex Construction Inc. was the lowest of six bids received and meets the City’s specifications and requirements;

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 $633,819.00 (excluding HST);

c)    in accordance with the Drainage Act, the 2023 Cousins Drain Report by Spriet Associates, BE ACCEPTED as appended to the above-noted staff report;

d)   the financing for this project BE APPROVED as set out in the Sources of Financing Report, 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;

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

g)    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-2023-016); and,

h)    the Mayor and the City Clerk BE AUTHORIZED to execute any contract or other documents, if required, to give effect to these recommendations. (T05-2023)

3.   Scheduled Items

None.

4.   Items for Direction

4.1   Downtown Bike Locker Pilot Project Results

2023-05-24 - Staff Report - (2.2) - Downtown Bike Locker Pilot Project Results

Moved by S. Trosow

Seconded by P. Cuddy

That, on the on the recommendation of the Deputy City Manager, Environment and Infrastructure, the following actions be taken with respect to the staff report dated May 24, 2023, related to the Downtown Bike Locker Pilot Project Results:

a)    the Civic Administration BE DIRECTED to end the current pilot project phase and continue to offer secure bike parking services with the existing bike lockers in the three existing locations;

b)    the Civic Administration BE DIRECTED to move the Clarence Street lockers for reinstallation at Central Avenue and Richmond Street in early Fall;

c)    the Civic Administration BE DIRECTED to provide recommendations for bike locker rental fees in 2024 for inclusion in the Fees and Charges By-law; and,

d)    the Civic Administration BE DIRECTED to include learnings from the bike locker pilot project and a financial analysis of additional secure bike parking options as part of the development of London’s Bike Parking Plan as input into the Mobility Master Plan. (T03-2023)

Motion Passed (4 to 0)

4.2   Final Connected and Automated Vehicle Plan

2023-05-24 - Staff Report - (4.2) - Final Connected and Automated Vehicle Plan - Full

Moved by P. Cuddy

Seconded by C. Rahman

That, on the recommendation of the Deputy City Manager, Environment and Infrastructure, the following actions be taken with respect to the staff report dated May 24, 2023, related to the Final Connected and Automated Vehicle Plan:

a)    the final Connected and Automated Vehicle Plan, as summarized in the Executive Summary appended to the above-noted staff report, BE APPROVED; and,

b)    the Civic Administration BE DIRECTED to implement the various aspects of the plan as opportunities arise. (T10-2023)

Motion Passed (4 to 0)

4.3   Automated Enforcement Program Expansion Single Source 2023-142

2023-05-24 - Staff Report - (2.8) - Automated Enforcement Program Expansion Single Source 2023-142

Moved by P. Cuddy

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 May 24, 2023, related to the Automated Enforcement Program Expansion Single Source 2023-142:

a)    that Traffipax LLC, BE AWARDED the contract for the provision of red light cameras, associated equipment, maintenance, and data transfer services until the end of the contract period on April 30, 2025, in accordance with the terms and conditions of the Request for Approvals executed by the City of Toronto (RFP No. Doc2184528757) on behalf of the City of London and other participating Red Light Camera municipalities in accordance with Section 14.4 (g) of the Procurement of Goods and Services Policy; it being noted that there is an option to extend the contact at the discretion of the City of London for an additional two years (May 1, 2025 to April 30, 2027);

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

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

d)    the Mayor and the City Clerk BE AUTHORIZED to execute any contract or other documents, if required, to give effect to these recommendations;

e)    the Civic Administration BE DIRECTED to place the net revenue from the Red Light Camera Program in the Automated Enforcement Reserve Fund; it being noted that any revenue shortfalls will be funded from this reserve fund, if necessary; and,

f)    the information regarding the expansion of the previously approved Automated Speed Enforcement program, BE RECEIVED. (T06-2023)

Motion Passed (4 to 0)

Additional Votes:

Moved by S. Trosow

Seconded by C. Rahman

That, the clause be amended to add a part g) as follows:

g)    that Civic Administration BE DIRECTED to investigate and implement additional Red Light Camera locations as may be feasible.

Motion Failed (2 to 2)

5.   Deferred Matters/Additional Business

None.

6.   Confidential

Moved by P. Cuddy

Seconded by P. Van Meerbergen

That the Civic Works Committee convene In Closed Session for the purpose of considering the following:

6.1 Litigation/Potential Litigation/Matters Before Administrative Tribunals

A matter pertaining to litigation currently before the Superior Court of Justice, Court file No. 783/19 affecting the municipality and advice that is subject to solicitor-client privilege, including communications necessary for that purpose, in relation to the 2016 Sarnia Road Improvements from Wonderland Road North to Sleightholme Avenue, and advice that is subject to solicitor-client privilege, including communications necessary for that purpose.

Motion Passed (4 to 0)

The Civic Works Committee convened In Closed Session from 1:00 PM to 1:05 PM.

7.   Adjournment

The meeting adjourned at 1:08 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, 20 minutes)

Here’s Jim, can we do a sound check from Chambers, please? Testing. Perfect, thanks so much. Well, Chair, we know one counselor likes to turn up for his job.

Hello, everyone. Excuse me, welcome to the ninth meeting of Civic Works Committee. We’re joined in Chambers with Councillor Cuddy and myself, and we’ve got Councillor Van Neerbergen and Councillor Lewis, Deputy Mayor Lewis, sorry, online. And we’re just joined by Councillor Troso as well right now.

Yes, so please check the city’s website for additional meeting details, information. Meetings can be viewed live streamed on YouTube and on the city website. The city of London is situated on the traditional lands of the Anishinaabek, Haudenosaunee, Lenapawik, and Adawandran peoples. We honor and respect the history, languages, and culture of the diverse indigenous peoples who call this territory home.

The city of London is currently home to many First Nations, Métis, and Inuit today. As representatives of the people of the city of London, we are grateful to have the opportunity to work and live in this territory. The city of London is committed to making every effort to provide alternate formats of communication and support for meetings upon request. To make a request specific to this meeting, please contact cwc@london.ca or 519-661-2489, extension 2425.

With that, we’ll move to item number one, disclosures of pecanary interest. Seeing none, we’ll move on to the consent item. Items, item number two, so we’ve got 2.1 through 2.5. Looking to the committee, if there’s anything that you’d like to pull, Councilor Trozzo.

I don’t have anything to pull for amendments, but I do have some questions on 2.3 and 2.4 that are very minor. Thank you, okay. So what I’ll do is I’ll look for a mover and seconder, and then we’ll go into questions and comments. Moved by Councilor Cuddy, Councilor Trozzo, seconded.

Thank you, and then we’ll go to questions and comments. And Councilor Trozzo, I’ll start with you. Just one second, sorry. Go ahead, you wanted to go with which item, microphone.

I’m gonna ask through the chair, I’m gonna ask some questions about the amendments to the traffic and parking bylaw. I don’t have any issue with anything that’s in this report. I would just like to better understand how these amendments are initiated, what process they go through, and what role Councilors can play in participating in the legislative process. Thank you.

Mr. Mercrae. Thank you through the chair. The traffic and parking bylaw is very vast.

It really sets such the legislative framework around our streets with respect to a whole lot of items ranging from speed limits to parking rules, to use of lanes and via vehicular regulations. So it’s very broad, approximately a year, year and a half ago. Council directed some of the authorities to staff to do on a administrative process, some of the more minor items, routine items, such as parking and particular processes like that that have processes in place, that sort of guide the decision making. And those amendments are reported out on an annual basis to Council, and then one of those reports this committee saw maybe four months ago.

So the number of amendment reports as a result of that process is now fewer. There tends to be a three or four of them per year, and they address any issues that staff become aware of based on operational needs, public concerns, if the issues submitted through CRM and other channels. Thank you. Thank you, that’s helpful.

Continuing through the chair, does the delegation preclude members of Council from initiating changes to the bylaw at this committee? Thank you, Mr. McCray. Certainly not.

I would suggest that if a counselor has a concern or a desired change that the process to start would be connecting with staff and staff could figure out the most appropriate mechanism, whether it’s through the delegated administrator process or still through the council approval to see which mechanism is appropriate and if the changes are as well. Thank you, follow up, counselor? Finally, and this will be simple. Are there provincial limitations on our ability to set speed limits anywhere in the city?

Are there particular roads that we cannot set speed limits on? Thank you, Mr. McCray. Municipal Council has the authority to set the speed limits on all the municipal roads.

So it doesn’t include the provincial highways, the Traverse City, highways 401, 402 and a south 30 section of highway four, but Council has the authority for all the other municipal streets and there’s policies that guide staff’s decision-making around that and recommendations. Okay, so just so I’m clear, like 401, no, 402, no, that lower part of Highbury, no, but just because the street like Richmond has a provincial sign on it does not preclude us from talking about, for example, Richmond. I’m just using Richmond as an example. Mr.

McCray. That is correct. Counselor, that exhausts your questions for now. Great, I’ll go to Deputy Mayor Lewis, if there are no further questions from committee members.

Thanks, seeing none, I’ll go to Deputy Mayor Lewis. Thank you, Madam Chair. And I just wanna take a moment to say thank you to our staff and this is with regard to the new PXOs and the new traffic signalization intersections in particular. And I know that Councilor McAllister is away on his honeymoon, but I promised to on his behalf and this affects both our wards, the new signalized intersection at Hamilton and Clark Road is going to be very, very welcomed by the community.

That’s been a long time ask and we’re happy to see that coming forward. On the new PXOs, I also want to really give a shout out. I know that folks don’t think that our staff ever leave City Hall sometimes, but a new crossover that’s happening in War II on Graydon at Richard Place, that’s gonna provide a crossover for access to Kwanis Park. Mr.

McCray actually came out and we spent an hour biking to some locations in my ward where there were concerns. This was one of those. He was really helpful in identifying the opportunity to move forward with a PXO in this location. And I just wanna say how great it is that we have staff that will do that.

And so I just wanna particularly acknowledge Mr. McCray on this particular one. He is not alone. I will say that as the bike lane construction happened over a couple of years, Mr.

John Zmul was out in person several times to meet with myself and to explain some things to area residents. So our staff do go to look at these things. It’s not just lines on a map to them. And I just wanted to acknowledge that.

Thank you for that. And Mr. McCray, I didn’t know that was something that you did, but I know you bike ward seven pretty often. So I’m okay with that.

Great to hear. And I will say I’ve heard had really great engagement with folks around the installation of the traffic signals and the pedestrian signals that are being recommended in my ward and really, really positive conversations. So thank you for the work there. Any other comments from members of committee or from visiting counselors on the items in the consent agenda?

Councillor Rossell, go ahead. Quick question on 2.4. And as Mr. McCray through the chair, as Mr.

McCray knows, I’ve been a regular repeat customer in terms of coming in with petitions and requests for all sorts of different things. And I don’t think that’s gonna stop in the near future. I’m interested in learning more about the role of the Ontario traffic manual, OTM, because that’s cited quite a bit in communications that I get, particularly in regards to denying a request because it doesn’t meet the standards in the OTM. My question is, what is the role in municipal law of the OTM?

Is it binding or is it municipality free to exceed the roles in the OTM if they result in stronger safety measures? Mr. McCray. Through the chair, the Ontario traffic manuals provide guidance to road authorities across the province and they’re intended to provide a level of consistency, recognizing that road users cross municipal boundaries, and they’re also used by the provincial ministry of transportation.

It’s a combination, like as far as whether we are obliged to follow them legally or if they’re guidelines, it’s really a combination of both and it really comes down to the specific wording in the manual about whether it’s words like shall or be considered type of wordings. And since some of the very specific legal type obligations relate to, for example, traffic signal designs and a lot of that is tied back to the highway traffic act. So it’s very prescriptive and it’s items that we don’t have leeway to deviate from much. With respect to other items, assessing traffic control devices, there can be leeway.

And in appropriate cases, staff use judgment to interpret the Ontario traffic manual guidance. And yeah, so really it’s a combination of both. Thank you. Great, that’s very helpful and through the chair.

So what I think I’m coming to understand is it provides a certain level of care and municipalities, if they follow that, it’s gonna help them if there’s a dispute in terms of whether they were following a certain level of care and they provide a standard. But what I’m also hearing is there could be situations where a request for a particular traffic calming measure or signal would not meet the numerical quantitative threshold under the manual, but there might be other qualitative considerations provided by people in their living situation that could permit the city to grant that relief, even though the numerical threshold was not met. Do I have that right? Mr.

McCray. Yeah, depending on the scenario, staff always apply a level of judgment to the criteria. The traffic manuals tend to provide sort of a numerical and policy level approaches. And that is, I guess, to provide for a driver and road user expectation to be consistent across the province and to keep things understandable.

But that said, and it also considers safety. And there’s often various levels of considerations for traffic control devices, both based on traffic counts, speeds, collisions, safety, things like that. So, but having said that, staff typically do apply a level of judgment when considering specific requests. And my last question is, is there a mechanism for residents who have requested certain measures to have the denial given further review?

Mr. McCray. Really, it’s a function of the request. Staff staff are always open for a further dialogue with the resident to gain an understanding of the various perspectives.

Beyond that, it really depends. Where it goes from there is a function of the type of request that it would be. Thank you. I’ll look to committee for any further questions before I’ll call the vote.

Do you have another question? Go ahead, Mr. Counselor. Oh, you’ll move it.

Thank you. Yeah, I’ll move item 2.1. So, we already have the mover and seconder. We’re just ready to call the vote then.

Thank you. Councilor Van Mirbergen, Councilor Trossa. All vote, yes. Thank you.

Closing the vote, the motion carries four to zero. Thank you. We have no scheduled items for today, items for direction. We’ve got 4.1, the downtown bike locker pilot project results.

Looking to committee for any questions or comments, and then I’ll be looking for a mover and seconder. Councilor Trossa, go ahead. Thank you for working. First of all, thank you very much for the work you’ve done on this, I think it’s absolutely remarkable that we’ve come this far.

Before I put this on the floor though, I would move it ‘cause I fully support this. Is there any room in your view for any amendments that could help your department move requests for additional lockers to the budget process? ‘Cause what I’m hearing from people, and I’ve really gotten out there and tried to talk to people about this, it’s totally positive feedback. People would like to see more of these.

They want to see them along major transit routes, and they want to see them, because especially with the larger e-bikes, now you can’t necessarily put those on LTC. And I figure it might be simpler to just create a few more bike lockers than try to deal with the buses. And the other place is public libraries and public rec centers. ‘Cause I understand that there are some challenges with doing this on private property, although I know that some counselors are trying to address that too.

But is there any room in here for just an amendment so council can sort of send a sense of how much we support what you’re doing? Thank you, I’ll go to Ms. Sheeran. I know other counselors have also had some conversations around this with you as well.

So thank you, I’ll go to you. And I just wanted to also acknowledge that Councillor Palosa is with us as well, thanks. Thank you, Madam Chair, and thank you for that Councillor Trosto. We’re very happy about the work that’s come out of the pilot project.

We certainly are hearing demand throughout the city. Our real next step is to do our citywide bike parking plan that’s going to help us understand a spectrum of bike parking options for these lockers that could be for municipally funded and operated on municipal land, which would cover off municipal lots, buildings, community centers, those sorts of things, all the way to a spectrum of maybe some best practices and supports for fully privately provided. I think at this point we don’t necessarily need a motion prior to budget, but this would certainly be a potential mini-case for consideration of budget through that process. And we’ll be working through that bike parking strategy and the mobility master plan to identify real needs areas where these can provide the most benefit to all ages and abilities of users.

With the note that we do understand they need to be somewhat bigger because of e-bikes and cargo bikes. Thank you, okay, so I’ve got, I’ll take a question from Councillor Cuddy before moving and Councillor Van Mirberg and before moving to visiting Councillors. Go ahead, Councillor Cuddy. Thank you, Chair and through you.

I just want to thank staff for the fine work you’ve done with respect to cycle. I belong to a cycle club and many members have used it. They’re really happy with it. I personally haven’t used it yet, but I will be using it very shortly now that I have instructions on how to use it.

But I want to thank you for the really fine work that you’ve done in promoting cycling and active transit in our community. And this is going to be great for London and it’s going to be great for our downtown. Thank you. Thank you, Councillor Van Mirberg.

Sorry, Paul, did you have your hand up? Yes, I did, yeah, thank you, Chair. Yeah, my question for staff, I see that there is somewhat of an issue of some vandalism with these units. How serious of a problem is this?

And do we have a quantifiable monetary amount of what we’re looking at here or a percentage of usage versus vandalism to just maybe expand on that? Thank you, Mr. Stanford. Did you have any comments on that?

Through the chair, the vandalism has been primarily of two kinds, a little bit of graffiti that has occurred and that has been quickly removed. And one unit was actually, I guess either with a crowball or some metal object, there was an attempt to basically open it. So those are really sort of the two categories. Overall, it has actually been very little in the scheme of things.

So it’s something there that we continue to address very quickly. And we believe that the one location on Clarence, where a couple of these incidents have occurred, when we move that as we’re recommending just north onto central, will be in even a higher visibility area and it’ll further reduce what has occurred. Going into a project like this, we did expect that there would be some graffiti. So we had planned for this and it’s not a surprise to hear.

And it’s just, I hate to say it, but an ongoing reality of some of the amenities we put in place on public property. Thank you, follow up, Councillor? Terms of cost, are we looking at significant costs that would offset revenues that are coming in? How would you describe that in terms of cost?

Thank you, Mr. Stanford. Do you have that information? Through the chair, over the year and a half of the pilot project time period, it was being the order of about $2,000 to $3,000.

So from our perspective, not a lot of dollars, we would hope that that would reduce over time. And as well, we think when these things are even more widely used, more activity around them, those items tend to reduce on their own as well. Thank you, go ahead, Councillor Vameo-Briggen. Okay, my last question, I think I gleaned from the report that, and correct me if I’m wrong, that there is a situation where homeless may be using, some homeless individuals may be using these units as storage facilities, is that something that’s happening?

Mr. Stanford? Through the chair on, I think two occasions, what occurred, the units were not properly locked when the cyclists left, and in that case, we did find some items that were left inside. And unfortunately, when the next user came up and was able to basically open the gate, they found those inside and reported them to us.

And then we used our procedures to basically correctly have the belongings removed, working with our community response unit. Okay, thank you very much. Thank you, I will go to Deputy Mayor Lewis and then to Councillor Palazzo. Well, thank you, Madam Chair.

And I’m gonna say as well, I think that this pilot project has been a good success. I’m excited to see what the future brings. I know that there’s lots of people with suggestions, myself included, and I know that Ms. Chair and Mr.

Stanford were copied on an email just last night that I reached out to the Mon with some ideas. And I would say, for those who haven’t taken a peek at the upcoming SPPC agenda, Councillor Frank actually has a motion asking for a business case for an expansion that would include the Masonville White Oaks and Argyle Mall transit hubs as locations for these. So we’ll have a chance to discuss some, a business case at SPPC on this particular project. I wanna say, I think there’s lots of opportunities for some different partnerships, some different opportunities.

I could see places like smart centers wanting to be involved in providing some spaces on their property. I could see some potential in places like 100 Kellogg Lane for the folks who, especially in the summer, lots of youngsters who wanna bike over and visit the factory or places like that. So I think there’s great potential here. I will share just my own food for thought in terms of lessons learned.

I think that visually, most people still don’t identify them as bike lockers. And I know that we’re using a vendor to provide these. I don’t know what can be done to change the appearance to make it more clear what their use is for. I even wonder if perhaps some of the attempts to gain access were motivated by the thought that there might be copper wiring or other salvageable materials inside, which of course there aren’t, but some folks may not walk through that logic process.

So for me, the bigger issue is, how can we make them appear more, I don’t even wanna say attractive, but more awareness for what they are there for. In terms of graffiti, I don’t know if there’s an opportunity to involve some young artists to use some of the side panels to make them more decorative. Obviously, there’s an opportunity for some advertising revenue on the sides of those. But really, I think as we roll this out and through the master mobility plan and to share reference the bicycle parking plan, lots of opportunities here.

Very positive on how this has gone so far. I will say, I’ve only used it twice. First, when Councilor Plows and I recorded a promo video to let people know what was going on. And then the second time on a bike ride downtown where I was able to block my bike there and walk the remaining two blocks to Heroes and know that my bike was going to be safe while I was picking up some comic books to read.

But there was this little thing called an election last summer so I didn’t have as much time to ride my bike as I would have liked. I hope to get a chance to bike downtown a couple more times this summer. But I really do think the most important thing is that we do need to expand the use out into the neighborhoods. And I think the transit village sort of opportunities are an obvious next step.

So just sharing those thoughts with staff. Of course, I’m happy to hear any comments they have on those. But that’s my thoughts and very, very supportive of this program. Mr.

Stanford, any comment before I go to Councilor Plowsa? Through the chair, thank you very much for the comments and the positive comments. The items you’ve referred to are items that we were going to and in fact will be incorporating into the bike parking plan. One of the things that really hasn’t been discussed here today and we’re talking about bike lockers, but as we look at the bike parking plan, we’re also looking at items that are even of a larger scale where you can actually get 20 and 30 bikes into a location.

The bike lockers we found work well, but once you have two or three or four bikes in them, then of course, the next people coming along can’t use them. So there is the appetite for some larger facilities. So everything I’m hearing today is moving in very positive direction and supports where we’re heading with the bike parking plan and the larger work with the mobility master plan. So thank you.

Thank you, Councilor Plowsa, go ahead. Thank you, Madam Chair for recognizing me at your committee, as the past chair of this committee and last term council member, you always do a pilot project and you wonder, is it gonna be really the success that you’re hoping in realizing cyclists in the community, we’re doing a strong advocacy of what they needed, and especially as we saw outdoor patios and people to dismount from their bikes as they actually spend more using active transportation at local retailers than people in cars do, as cars just passed by, but it’s easy to hop on and off bicycle. Glad to see the pilot project was a success and certainly over the last term of council, Deputy Mayor Lewis and I were advocating hard for those destinations to get you to a transit hub, like at Argyle at White Oaks, to take you into work, let you get that last mile that you might not have great transit to your neighborhood, but you have a bike and you get to the transit stop and you get really quickly, especially as the bus rapid transit, higher order transit, whatever we’re gonna call it comes into implementation to really start seeing the gains from people using those and realizing that we have wonderful city services that people might be using. Major parks are outdoor recreation facilities, community swimming pools that you might want to just bike over to, but as always, it was a concern of is your bike gonna be there when you get back, especially realizing it’s your chosen mode of transportation, it really is important that people feel safe when they take them out.

So looking forward to this and for the business case that may or may not be coming forward in the multi-year budget plan, as we certainly have declared a climate emergency, this falls nicely in with that as well. So thank you to staff in all the intersections of departments who put work into this and for Londoners for using it and getting out and enjoying our community. Thank you. Thank you.

Any further speakers before I call for a mover and seconder? Seeing none, I’ll look for a mover and seconder. Thank you, Councillor Trosto and Councillor Cudi. With that, we will look to call the vote.

So it’s open and e-scribe for you. As you’ll see, there are A, B, C and D for this particular recommendation and that is open for you. Using the vote, the motion carries four to zero. Thank you.

With that, we’ll move on to item 4.2, which the final connected and audited vehicle plan. I will look to Mr. McRade to provide us with a little bit of a summary of this plan before we entertain questions, comments and a mover and seconder. Thank you.

Thank you through the chair. I would actually like to express my appreciation and call on Mr. John Costniak, who was the project manager for this initiative and also the author of the report and really a subject matter expert on this. So with that, John, we’ll provide a short synopsis of what is before our committee today.

Thank you and we’ll go to Mr. Costniak and thank you so much for your work on this report. And since it is such a detailed and technical report, we thought we’d give you a little time to speak to it. Thank you.

Through the chair, thank you very much for this opportunity to speak to the connected and automated vehicle plan today before the Civic Works Committee. I’ll just refer to it as the CAV plan just for simplicity’s sake. So I can get more through here. Just a brief background, the province of Ontario back in 2016 had initiated pilot program regarding connected vehicles and automated vehicles in this province.

It was the first province in Canada to do so. Subsequent to that in 2018, council had directed staff to prepare this CAV plan that’s before everybody today. And in that period, since 2018, we did perform some initial public input. I believe that was at the beginning of 2020 a little bit before COVID hit us.

And also the year prior in 2019, council did have a resolution which had some panel of three experts come and speak before council and council had the opportunity to ask a lot of interesting questions during that particular day. And as well as we had an internal staff event to learn more about the industry and the different development of those technologies at that time. This culminated in our draft CAV plan coming before council in September of 2022 that provided essentially what you’re seeing today, the plan as it is in this format. And based on the feedback we received from the public, we were able to focus into eight strategic areas of focus.

When we got feedback from the public, we did see common themes along topics such as road safety and security, mobility integration and efficiency and same with environmental sustainability, so of no surprise. So we did want to keep a lot of these particular pieces in focus. And as we did more consultation since September when we came with the draft report, we did hear other questions about the types of technologies and concerns around things like privacy and security and something that we’ve tried to keep top of mind and the development of this document. So really, since that time, there haven’t been any substantial changes to the document.

It’s really just been a lot of clarification and a lot of addressing of concerns that the public had related to these types of technologies, which there is a lot of unknowns so at this stage. So really just trying to get a sense of how this technology might impact the city and the future. I think generally speaking, we’re looking at this as more of an evolutionary than a revolutionary type of technology, but nonetheless, it’s important to be proactive as this technology emerges so that we’re not reacting to things. I think there’s been different examples of that in the past that have happened just in general with many municipalities around Canada and the US.

So really just to advocate for this CAB plan so that we do have the tools before us to address this technology that emerges. And if we do have some opportunities with the technology to then provide it with the tool of this CAB plan in any recommendations we make to council if we come back in the future to move forward with something. I think that’s primarily the overview of that and open to questions if anybody has it. Thank you very much.

Thank you. Councillor Hutrosa, did you have a question? Thank you, I have a number of questions about both, but I’ll try to keep them separate and I’ll start with the cameras. These seem to be very effective for the most part and they seem to be cost effective.

Sorry, so we’re on the final connected automated vehicle plan first. Do you have any questions on that? Nope. Okay, any questions from member of committee before we move on to the next item, your vote?

Okay, seeing no questions, I’ll look for a mover and a seconder, Councillor Cuddy, I’ll second. And we will open the vote just a moment. Closing the vote, the motion carries four to zero. Thank you.

Okay, we’ll move on to item number 4.3, automated enforcement program expansion, single source 2023, 142. And I do know there are questions from committee members on this report. I’ll go to Councillor Trozzo first and then see if there are other Councillor’s questions. Thank you.

This is another instance of I really fully support this report and I want to see if I can maybe push it along a little bit more because I think this is a good program in both respects. Since these pay for themselves, why don’t we order more? That’s sort of the simple question that a lot of people are asking. I’ll start with that.

Mr. McRae? The primary focus, the only sole focus of this program is to improve safety. Out of that flows the fact that they are self-funded.

So to select the locations, the criteria is developed that involves looking at the collisions at particular intersections, going and visiting the location to confirm with realize, looking at like logistically is there room for a camera to be located and also looking forward into our capital program to make sure that a camera location won’t be disrupted. So there’s a bunch of safety considerations. The collision analysis in particular identifies that there won’t be necessarily a net safety benefit at all locations. So we prioritize using a systematic software type analysis, the science of road safety and prioritize to those locations where the safety benefit will be of most value and that is really guided.

The selection of the initial 10 location for red light cameras that exist and the current process to identify an additional 10. Council follow-up? Through the chair, further, do you have an estimate as to how many of these devices we could accommodate within the city that meet all of your criteria? Mr.

McRae? We don’t have an eye on a total number. I think our recommendation today is a combination of where the safety benefits will provide most benefit and also a function of PB&D program administratively manageable. Does that mean that the administrative aspects don’t scale up as well as you would like?

Could you, could I better understand that? Because where I’m going with this is if there’s support on council for us to assist you in expanding this safety program, we would like to facilitate that. Thank you, Mr. Chair, and then Mr.

McRae? If I may, Madam Chair, one of the limiting factors for this program has been the ability to process the tickets after they’re issued. So everything is processed through the drain processing center of the city of Toronto, which understandably has some capacity limitations. They are moving towards an amps approach, which is administrative monetary penalties, which would provide a great deal, more flexibility in terms of those offenses, being able to be processed, issued, and applied appropriately.

If that occurs, which is expected for next year, that would give us more flexibility in the size and scale of the program. It does pay for itself. That’s the intent is around road safety. So it’s not meant to be a money generating opportunity for other things.

So we would be able to scale up our own side of things, but we need that capacity in a larger legal system that supports the issuance of these tickets. There are also some other conversations happening with other Ontario municipalities about what options there may be to assist with that processing once it’s issued. Let’s see, the camera has taken the picture and a ticket has been issued for review. Mr.

McRae, any follow-up? Yeah, the Chair points out an important point. I’ll look to Mr. McGuire to clarify.

I think if Council was to choose to direct staff to look to expand the program further, we could, I think there could be capacity for an incremental, there are limitations, as Ms. Chair points out, there may be an opportunity to go slightly incrementally more than the 10 cameras recommended in the report today, but there are certain limitations. Mr. McGuire, do you want to elaborate, please?

Mr. McGuire. Yes, thank you through the Chair. The 10 locations are number 10 was chosen based on our past and expectations.

There is some for the red light cameras. There’s some that we could perhaps go up to as many as 20, but then we would be at a point where, for various reasons whether there’s a no room in the, at the intersection to put the cameras in, but another 10 on top of that, so a total of 20, I think could be done without impacting the legal system or staff’s administration abilities here locally. Thank you, Councillor, did you have a follow up? Yes, and I also want to get to the other part of this, but I’ll stop with this question and maybe yield to us some other speakers and then maybe come back.

Would you be room for an amendment, very slight amendment authorizing staff to consider an expansion of this program as they consider warranted. The clerk would have to properly draft that, but what I’m hearing is we do have a little bit more capacity and there seems to be a taste for doing this. So may I suggest an amendment that would authorize that? So how about we look at that, we’ll look for a mover and seconder for the report, then we’ll look to amend to add that item into and give the clerk a moment to come up with some language as well, and I would need, of course, some support for that as well.

But I’ll just go to Ms. Sheer. Was there any thought on an amendment there? Madam Chair, I think as long as it doesn’t tie us to a maximum or a specified number, if you’re asking us to expand the program to the extent that is manageable within those current constraints, we can take a look at what that maximum number would be.

What I’m hearing from our team is that it could be as much as 20, but it’s probably not 100. So if there’s that ability for staff to take a look and find out that sort of maximum thing we can do in the context of the system constraints and capacity constraints internally. Thank you. Okay, so I’ve got a couple of other hands up as well, and first I’ll look to committee to see if there’s any other questions.

I’ll look for a mover and seconder just to get this on the floor, and then I’ll take questions from Deputy Mayor Lewis. Okay, Councillor Cuddy, Councillor van Mirbergen, thank you, and I’ll take questions from Deputy Mayor Lewis, go ahead. Thank you, Madam Chair. Sorry, I’m taking up a lot of your time at committee today, but you’ve got an agenda with lots of good things that I wanted to lend some voices to.

First of all, very supportive of the staff report and the recommendations moving forward. I think I’ve been very clear if anyone has seen the stories in the media, my opinion on this, both with red light cameras and with the automated speed enforcement. I think these are great programs. I would actually prefer to see us direct more scale up in the automated speed enforcement than the red light cameras.

I think once we get to the 20 red light cameras, we’re covering probably the most significant problem intersections in the city, although I wouldn’t be opposed to that being upgraded, perhaps just a little bit more, if there’s an opportunity to do so. I do appreciate Ms. Chair’s comments, though, that we really do have some constraints in terms of processing, because it’s all going through the Toronto Processing Center. And if that goes to an amps process, that’ll make things easier, but we’re not there yet.

I did, though, want to take this opportunity. And I’ve had this question posed now five times after my comments in the media over the last week or so on this. So I’m wondering through you if I can ask staff, and I know I’ve asked Mr. McRae this offline, there seems to be a, what I’m going to call an urban legend growing, that we are finding first responders, fire and ambulance in particular, when they’re responding to a call with lights and sirens active.

And I just wonder if so that we can be clear what the public, if Mr. McRae could comment on that for us, or another member of staff. I shouldn’t suggest that it’s just Mr. McRae.

Yeah, thank you. So Mr. McRae, what Deputy Mayor Lewis is referring to is communication from constituents around the fact that there is potentially a cost to first responders if they’re responding with lights and sirens on, and they go through one of these automated red lights, are they subject to any penalties? Through the chair, the short answer is no.

The Highway Traffic Act provides exemptions for fire department vehicles, police vehicles, emergency vehicles, with lights and sirens on, in response to a call that they are exempt. And for the most part, the processes are set up to avoid this, and in particular, there should not be red light cameras, red light camera infractions issued if these vehicles are following the procedures as laid out in the Highway Traffic Act. Thank you. Deputy Mayor Lewis, did you have any follow-up questions?

Yeah, I just wanna say thank you to Mr. McRae for getting that answer out there on the public record. I will certainly be using a clip of that to share what constituents to make them aware that this in fact is not the case, and I think that people need to understand that these tickets are reviewed by a human being, and if there’s any question, they don’t proceed. So, but I think that’s been outlined and I think the parameters of the Highway Traffic Act are very clear.

So I would just suggest through you to Councillors on the committee that perhaps rather than being specific to 10 additional or whatever the number might be, red light cameras that we just encourage staff to step up the program to the maximum opportunity. And I would want the flexibility for staff to determine whether that’s more automated speed enforcement or more red light cameras, because I think the automated speed enforcement in the school zones is just as important a road safety issue as the red light cameras. So I would just like to see some flexibility in that if we’re going to make some changes to, or offer staff some more open-ended opportunities to expand the program. Thank you, Ms.

Shear. Did you wanna comment on that at all? I believe Mr. McRae would actually like to comment on the practicality of expanding the AC program.

Thank you, Mr. McRae. Yeah, thank you. This report also does include an information section on the automated speed enforcement.

And it is basically essentially an update in that previously council provided approval, a ward of a contract for the implementation of up to seven automated speed enforcement cameras. And these are mobile cameras that get relocated periodically to different school zones around the city. So a significant ramp up in that program from two cameras currently that we’ve been running for the last year to seven. So a significant increase.

And really that does the administration, both the city administration and provincial offenses administration, administration for that program is more onerous. So we feel we are at a maximum capacity with this recommendation to go to seven for automated speed enforcement. So in short, some additional capacity available on the red light camera side, not so much on the automated speed enforcement program. Thank you, Deputy Mayor Lewis.

Yeah, just really quickly, I’ll just share. I know that some of the onerousness comes from regulations on the provincial government about signs having to go up early and be up for a certain period of time and all of that sort of thing. I just want to share with staff, I appreciate what you’re saying there. I’m glad we’re getting up to seven.

I will be continuing at every opportunity to have discussions with local MPPs, both government and opposition, about the opportunity to amend some of those regulations so that we have more flexibility to deploy those. Because it does, I know it does consume a fair amount of time, moving them from site to site. And it’d be much easier if we could just deploy them without having to give all of those advanced notices and signage changes all the time. So I just want to share that that’s a conversation all I’ll be continuing to have.

Thank you. Any further speakers before I put myself on the speakers list? Seeing none, if it’s okay, I’m going to speak from the chair. I will just, I agree with Deputy Mayor Lewis on this one.

13 schools feels like drop in the bucket for the amount of schools that we could be looking at the automated speed enforcement program with. And so I do think that there is opportunity. And again, I think it will be more advocacy on our side to try to get some of these more cumbersome regulations removed in order to be able to roll this program out more efficiently across the city. Okay, with that, I know that we have a mover and a seconder.

Are we still in need of a mover and a second for this? Okay, so we need a mover and a seconder for the original motions associated with that. And then we also had, I thought we did have a mover and a seconder. Petty and Mayor Regan?

Yes, we do, okay. And then we, you were looking, Councillor Trossa, to add to this with F? Yes, exactly what you have on the screen. Give me a minute and we’ll put that up for everybody to see.

Here, is the amendment up here? I’m not sure I’m sure. We’re just working on it one second. Okay, thank you.

Okay, thank you. So the wording should be open to you so that you can take a look. I’ll need a mover and a seconder for the amendment. Councillor Trossa, just to read it out that the clause be amended to add part G as follows, the civic administration be directed to investigate and implement additional red light cameras locations as may be feasible.

Second that. So we’re gonna vote first on the amendment and then the main motion and that’s open for you. Closing the vote, the motion failed two to two. Okay, now we’re going to deal with the main motion.

Closing the vote, the motion carries four to zero. Hey, thank you everyone. So that it concludes our items for direction. We have no deferred matters.

Is there any additional business before we move on to confidential? Seeing no additional business from the committee, I will look for a mover and a seconder to take us into closed session. Councillor Cuddy and Councillor van Mirbergen, thank you. We’ll open that for vote.

Closing the vote, the motion carries four to zero. Thank you, we’ll just take a couple of moments to get settled before we proceed with our agenda. Thank you. Okay, we are back.

I will look to Councillor Trosto to report out. I’m in camera, thank you. Thank you and to the chair at the ninth meeting of Civic Works Committee, May 24th. The committee went into closed session to consider a matter pertaining to litigation currently before the superior court of justice, affecting the municipality and advice that subject to solicitor client privilege, including communications necessary in relation to 2016 starting a road improvements and advice that subject to the solicitor client privilege, including communication necessary for that purpose and progress was made on that matter.

Thank you. Okay, with that, we’ll move on to item number seven, which is adjournment. Thank you, move in seconder and all in favor by hand. Thank you very much.

Have a great rest of your day, everyone.