hybrid suv list canada

good evening, ladies and gentlemen. i'm going to call to order this meeting ofthe council of the town of oakville for its regular meeting and i would like to inviteeveryone to stand and join council in "o' canada." o' canadaour home and native land true patriot love in all thy sons commandwith glowing hearts we see thee rise the true north strong and freefrom far and wide o canadawe stand on guard for thee god keep our landglorious and free

o' canadawe stand on guard for thee o' canadawe stand on guard for thee. //mayor burton:thank you, everyone. please be seated. you passed the audition. that was very well done! madame clerk, do we have any regrets for thisevening? //the clerk:yes, we have regrets from councillorrobin robinson and hutchings //mayor burton:any declarations of pecuniaryinterest?

moved by councillor duddeck, seconded by councillorlishchyna. all in favour? opposed, if any? all of the minutes have been moved and approved,madame clerk. council, with your permission i am now goingto, as a public presentation, present my tenth annual state of the town speech and i wantto thank everybody who came for it, and those of you who came for other things, i hope thatit will have something for you as well. we're gathered here together as residents,staff and members of the councils of our town and our region for the tenth annual stateof the town address in this chamber on the

traditional lands of the mississaugas of thenew credit. we're honoured by the attendance of so manycommunity leaders as well as by our regional chair, gary carr. chair carr, i want to thank you for your leadershipof the four municipal partners of the region of halton. together, we're working to make our communitiesacross halton more livable and more sustainable. this is my tenth report to you on the stateof our town. in it you will see a portrait of a communityachieving its goals. you'll also see a community on the thresholdafter great opportunity to do more to help

everyone participate in our successes. over the last ten years, our community hasembraced a vision to be the most livable town in canada. this year, oakville moved from sixth to thirdplace six sixth to third best place to live in the country in money sense's ratings. the city of ottawa was number 1. the city of burlington was number 2. and the town of oakville was number 3. so if you'll permit me, you could say thatwe have achieved best town in the country.

but however you count it, this is the bestranking we've ever had and it's the third year in a row that we have been in the topten. we were also named the best place in ontarioto raise children and the second best in all of canada. we are canada's safest community, and canada'shealthiest community and our economy is strong. as chair of the automakers, i'm optimisticabout the future of major employers like ford who today employ 5200 people in oakville. everywhere we look, we can see significantsigns of our vision's success. that success requires a strong foundationof fiscal health and stability.

you, the councils of our municipality havecreated that strong and stable fiscal foundation ten years ago oakville residents weary ofunpredictable and often unsustainably high property tax increases which could fluctuatefrom 2 to 4% a year, with no warning. now we have shifted to predictable and predictablylow total annual increases. for 8 years running we have set and met thegoal of keeping total property tax increases at or below inflation. residents will also be pleased i hope to hearwe're going to be able to meet that goal once again in the 2017 budget. i know many residents were happy this yearto receive the news from the municipal property

assessment corporation, mpac, of how muchtheir properties have risen in value over the past four years. happy about the value, you may have worriedabout the impact on your property tax. you'll be relieved to know that your home'staxes aren't going up as fast as your home's value is. we reset our tax rate to avoid any windfallsurge in tax revenue. all the same, we will retain and maintainour strong municipal financial position. chair carr places the highest importance onkeeping our triple a credit rating. we have done that again this year, even whilewe've made important investments to improve

livability. a triple a credit rating means you pay thelowest rate of interest when you borrow. we want to see our property taxes go towardsways to improve our livability and our sustainability. three of the ways i want to highlight are:one, providing better results runs and infrastructure roads and infrastructure; two, keeping upwith demand for community facilities; and three, protecting green space and growingour tree canopy. let's look first at our road improvement andinfrastructure work. the money allocated to road resurfacing tenyears ago was not enough to keep oakville's roads in good conditions or improving.

our roads and work staff, in response to council'sdesire to improve our roads, developed a plan to expand the amount of road work we can doin a year. this year we allocated very nearly doublethe funding of ten years ago and that funding will resurface 22 kilometers of oakville roadsthis year. by the time our roads plan is finished, virtuallyall of our roads will be in good condition. renewing and reinvigorating our downtown'sinfrastructure is another key priority. by 2019 when we do work the work to replacethe lakeshore road foundations in the downtown, we will have a complete vision and a constructionmitigation plan that the community can have faith in.

when the work's done in 2020, we'll have adowntown that's even more attractive than it was when we began. the second way that we are improving livabilityis our progress creating community centres in each of oakville's seven wards. this year, we have begun work on transformingthe oakville arena in trafalgar park into a south central community centre targetedat seniors and youth. we're about to begin the functional planningof the next community centre on the old otmh grounds on reynolds street. every two years, for the next four years,we will be opening a new community centre.

in ten years or sooner, we will add the neyagawaboulevard community centre expansion to the 16 mile sports complex. our town values our community facilities andour public assets. we were recently relieved to know that theprovince has decided to relax its pressure for consolidation of municipal hydro utilities. our hydro is already the ninth largest inontario and it's a tremendous asset for the town just the way it is. the third key to our livability and sustainabilitythat i want to highlight is making our town a cleaner, greener place to live.

high priorities for our councils are our parks,trails, ravines, waterfront and tree canopy. our green and natural assets make for happier,healthier residents. so we have to protect them. first, we created the oakville natural heritagesystem of 2300 acres of protected and natural lands, green space all across north oakville. then, working with chair carr we protectedour natural heritage system by making it part of a larger natural heritage system protecting50% of halton and connecting it and embedding it into green belt. we also committed to expanding oakville'surban forest canopy.

it might be the best in the gta today butwe set a goal to reach 40% canopy coverage by oakville's 200th anniversary. to do that we have a four part plan. we're beefing our policy of saving trees onprivate land. we're fighting the emerald ash tree borer. and of course we're planting proper trees. our policies reflect the ideas of stewardshipespoused by the indigenous peoples who first inhabited this land. among those ideas is the belief that we shouldmake decisions for seven generations, not

just for today or tomorrow. this idea reinforces our determination toprotect our environment and control growth to what fits. ten years ago we had local, regional and provincialrules that unfairly favoured developers. the local land use policies in our officialplans were full of loopholes and contradictions that allowed developers to run rough shotover residents and communities and win at the omb when we would oppose them. so we created the "livable oakville" and the"sustainable halton" official plans. these two plans introduced protection of ourgreen spaces and our stable established neighbourhood

from unwanted intensification. our plans now channel growth to six carefullyselected growth nodes. we've gone from losing 75% of the time atthe ontario municipal board, the omb, to winning 67% of the time. we're being challenged at the omb now overhow we will conduct the planning process that's required to consider the future of the glenabbey golf course. i'm confident of our success in that contest. our plans also work to protect heritage. this was inspired by the work of 6 term formmayor harry barrette.

his foundational work to protect and preserveour heritage is the work we built upon in our "livable oakville" plan. as proud as we are of our town and regionalofficial plans, we're now working to review, renew and revise these plans to make themeven more effective. we've also turned our attention to the needto improve the province's rules for development and we've won several improvements there already. now the province is considering changes totheir growth plan for the golden horseshoe and changes to the powers of the omb. our engagement with the province to get thesechanges will not let up in the coming months.

thanks to our mpps and cabinet ministers,kevin flynn and indira naidoo harris, we're we have planning staff who getthey have worked with us as local and regional councils to maximize the quality of our adviceto the province as it evaluates changes to its growth plan and to the omb. they are good reasons to be optimistic thatprovincial policies will change to help us achieve a more livable oakville. as we do, we will continue to attract morenewcomers to town. and the question newcomers ask me most iswhy we call ourselves a town. they point out we're surrounded by some ofthe country's largest urban centres.

we have 25 times the population of the placethat calls itself the city of dryden. we call ourselves a town because it reflectsthe warmth, the friendliness and the welcoming nature that has always helped newcomers tofit in and find their footing here. although we faced great challenges and hadour share of shortcomings, oakville's history is one where welcoming and diversity alwayswins out in the end. over the years oakville has been a place ofrefuge and of hope for those seeking security, prosperity and new horizons. that was the case starting nearly 200 yearsago when oakville was a destination for those fleeing on the underground railroad to escapeslavery and oppression.

the hope and opportunity oakville offers hasbeen shared with immigrant communities ever since. today oakville's diversity serves as a tremendoussource of our strength. we all benefit from our thriving south asian,sikh, hindu, muslim and our chinese, hispanic, european, black and indigenous communities. this year, residents of all backgrounds havecome together to welcome over 50 families from syria. our diverse population and our welcoming,neighbourly communities, are a key part of what sets oakville apart.

in many places the term "neighbour" is littlemore than a geographic destination. in oakville, being a neighbour still meansmore. in oakville, we feel good that kids know whichdoor to knock on when they need help. we have a neighbourly urge to volunteer more. being neighbourly pays us back in our community'ssafety and well being. all of us contribute what we can to the strengthof our community and oakville's strengths are abundant. we have a unified vision of what we want ourtown to be. we have committed community leaders workingside by side with us, to control growth and

protect their neighbourhoods. we also have what i believe to be the bestmunicipal staff in the country. as councils, we have many times leveragedthe strengths of our community and our staff to everyone's benefit. all of this is what makes me so confidentin our ability to do more. so with that in mind, let's look at the opportunitythat we have to be an even more inclusive and caring community. and to make sure that everyone can participatein and enjoy oakville's livability. oakville's poverty rate is two thirds theprovincial average.

oakville's assets as a community are wellabove the provincial average. our finances are the healthiest in ontario. we can do more. with a smaller poverty rate and greater capacityto deal with it, it makes sense that if oakville can't solve its poverty, then nobody elsecould either. we have expanded and extended our low incometransit pass to support people whose means of getting around is challenged. we've strengthened property tax defermentopportunities to help low income seniors. but we can do more.

oakville and halton can be the first municipalitywith a comprehensive set of community safety and well being plans to fundamentally changeour approach to poverty and community well being for everyone. in the year ahead it's going to be my focusto expand safety and well being of our communities. our municipality is blessed with volunteerorganizations who all have much to contribute to this work. think of the vital signs and solutions workby the oakville community foundation. think of the ambitious targets that the oakvilleunited way sets and meets every year. think of the halton community investment fundthat has grown to be such a significant force

for good under halton chair gary carr. think of the leadership of people like junecockwell, co chair of the halton poverty round table. think of the many members of the chamber ofcommerce and other service clubs and our youth sports groups who all care about our community'ssafety and well being. if we reach out to each other to create thesecommunity safety and well being plans, the same way we did when we created the "livableoakville" and "sustainable halton" plans, we will enjoy great success. for the past ten years, i have said the secretto oakville's success is that we're a city

that calls itself a town and acts like a village. that will remain the secret to our successfor years to come. as it pleasure to work alongside residents,staff, and you, my fellow members of council, to move forward with our "livable oakville"and ""sustainable halton"" visions. the last ten years have been a time of tremendoussuccess. i look forward to ten more years of our success,working together to protect our future for many generations to come. thank you very much for considering my remarks. now, council, we have a number of delegatesdelegations tonight.

and before we do that, the clerk would begrateful if we had a mover and a seconder to receive my report. councillor lapworth and councillor knoll. thank you. madame clerk, call the first delegation? //the clerk:the first delegation is berrislodge speaking on item 5 of the sixth line pavement markings. //mayor burton:mr. lodge, welcome.

council looks forward to your information. but it would assist everybody if you wouldcome to the microphone. and then everyone at home will be able tohear you too. //mr. lodge can't be here tonight. there was an event that did not allow himto be here. however, there was a few of us on our street,including myself, representing the sixth line with that issue that we are about to talkabout. we have this five (indiscernible) includingmy wife here.

i have been living in oakville for years. i was here when nothing was around. the sixth line was straight until you cutoff half of it: i love oakville. i moved from mississauga to here for the past31 years. we had an incident here with the sixth line,and i call it an incident because i'm terrified. the markings on sixth line when i moved here,there was no markings on the street. there was no roads, there was no sidewalk. we never had a problem. now the they change the markings on the street,the way it is for parking on the street.

everybody on sixth line to the north of (indiscernible)road has a 2 car garage. and we have about four parking spaces in ourdriveway, besides the 2 car garage. it is beyond me to see that they re markedthe street and put in parking on either side of the street. and on top of that, they put the bicycle lanenext to the traffic, the flowing traffic. that is on sixth line. sixth line, when i came here, it was verythere was not much of traffic. we didn't even have buses, i remember. we had meetings about the transportation inoakville.

so everything was fine. until the developer came in and everythingwent on fine. there was still no problem until the markingswent in last year. they put them in. i have a problem, and so do many of the peopleon my street, getting out of my driveway. and the people that that's using the sixthline do not live on sixth line. they come from the north and from the eastand the west to escape trafalgar road which is generally always blocked up at rush hourtraffic. we can't get out of our driveway in the morningfrom i would say about 8 o'clock until 9:30.

and the people using the roads, some of them,they're not cautious. they see you trying to get out.and if i'm going north, i have to be very quick to back my car out to get on the otherside before i can start going north. one, they won't let you out.and two, when i only have one head. i can only look one way at a time. by the time you get out there, a car is comingup. it is a dangerous i don't know what researchthey did. i was not notified. i have calculated my taxes since i have comehere to about $3,500 $36,000, since i have

been living here. i don't think i deserve to be suffering fromthis affliction of getting out of my driveway. it's not i alone. there's others. i spoke to a lot of people in the neighbourhood. i canvassed it.and unfortunately they are not here tonight, some of them but i hope that council, whoeverdid it, would take a better look at the people that they are serving. when we elect council members, they are speakingfor us.

i think when we and i'm glad, mayor, whenyou say "we," it's inclusive. it is a community. this is a beautiful town. but you can't just start squeezing us at theexpense of what they call development. this is not development. we don't need development on the sixth line. we need the place to go back the way it was. the lines were fine. we had no problem.

you have never seen us here in 30 years complainabout anything. they re marked the street and here i am tonight. i could be in someplace better than havingthis meeting. this is not necessary. i would be happy and so is the other residentsthat i have spoken to, which is most of the residents on the sixth line, to have themput back the markings the way they were. we were quite happy with it. i don't know who benefits because there'snobody on the sixth line that needs parking. those two parking lines they put in there,nobody on the sixth line needs it.

like i say, we have four parking spaces inour driveway and a 2 car garage. we need to do something about this. i think if you're going to do something, thecommunity should be notified. get the if you're speaking for us, you shouldknow what we're thinking. and i would appreciate if they put back linesthe way they were. //mayor burton:thank you very much for bringingthat information. before you go, are there any questions forthe gentleman? thank you very much, sir, for your information. madame clerk, the next delegation?

//the clerk:the next delegation is janet hasletttheall, here from the joshua creek residents association to speak to the private tree protectionby law review, which was item 7 on community services. //mayor burton:thank you for coming, ms. haslett theall and council has your letterand we're looking forward to your information. //well, you have my letter so therefore iwouldn't take additional time to read it. i want to add three extra comments becausethe community services did have a very fulsome discussion about the importance of not onlythe new private tree by law and the great work that was done by the town staff but alsothe importance of dealing with homes that

are being redeveloped on properties, whetherthey be a "developer" or by an individual within the building envelope, that that alsoneeds to be addressed. so i won't take important time of yours toreread the letter. hopefully you've noted it and hopefully tonightwe will proceed with a new private tree by law and then some work on protecting the treesunder site plan and/or another alternative. //mayor burton:thank you very much for yourinformation. councillor adams has a question for you. //it's not actually a question. it's only a comment that you noted here arequest that we provide some additional information

on trees where the ownership is in doubt. for example, boundary trees. there is already a request for staff to lookat the issue of boundary trees with town trees. so i thank you for that additional comment. //thank you. //it's actually a question of staff relatedto your letter here and it's the question to staff is: when will we be coming back witha report regarding the issues that have been highlighted? which is more than she's going more than beyondthe private tree by law which is really great

and i appreciate that. //through you, mr. mayor, we've got two important studies stillto complete. we've got the urban forestry tree managementplan to update as well as the and in speaking with my colleagues in development and engineeringwe're predicting that will come back in the fourth quarter of 2017. //i thank you very much. //mayor burton:thank you. //the clerk:the next delegation is dr. giulianacasimirri from oakvillegreen conservation

association, also here to speak to the privatetree by law. //mayor burton:welcome, dr. casimirri. //thank you very much, mayor burton and council,for the opportunity to speak. again, my name is giuliana casimirri. i'm the executive director of oakvillegreenand i have quite a lot of ecology background, so i come at this with a ph.d. in communitybased forest management. oakvillegreen has done a lot of great work,planted over 4,000 trees. done a lot of urban forest stewardship aswell and we're very proud of that work that we can accomplish as a small group with limitedresources.

it comes about because we have wonderful staffsupport and council support. and people in oakville recognize that urbanforests are important. and that is a milestone that i think you shouldall be proud of. but when we look at the private tree by law,it as i said before, if i use the analogy of a tree, it sticks out like a dead branchon an otherwise healthy and growing tree. so it's something that absolutely we supportthe recommendations made by staff. we were quite involved in all the consultationsthat went along with that. the primary one that we absolutely supportwholeheartedly is the removal of the notification process.

and i have brought along my dbh tape tonightto demonstrate that at the moment this is how you measure the diameter at breast heightof a tree. and if i pull it all the way out, the currentnotification process allows you to take four trees in a year, this big. so if we wrap that around, that's a reallybig hole, times four. so we would like and those are you can seefrom the data that results in about 1% of our urban tree canopy that's been lost andthat was over a 4 year period. is so not the entire length of our historybut just in the four years that the data was reported on.and i also wanted to say that we the second

thing that we absolutely support is the claritywith the recommendations for compensation. that has been put in the by law. we would love to see that happen as well. and i won't take too much more time. i do have a few additional comments in additionto the comments i have provided to you that were written. and so obviously i would urge you to not delay. and i understand that this has to go to budgetso that you have the resources to properly implement and enforce this by law but i wouldurge council to ensure that that process does

not take too long because we can see the losseshappening as we speak. i would also suggest, in addition to developinga list of native trees for homeowners that are permitted to be planted or suggestionsto be planted tree species that are native to the region and their requirements. so that makes it easier for homeowners togo ahead and take that step and do the tree planting compensation that's required. i would also urge you to look to oakvillegreenas a partner to developing a private tree planting support and incentive program. and we have many successful models.

there's a wonderful one in toronto operatedby another non profit called "leaf." and we strongly urge you as well part of thediscussion at community services was about invasive trees. in particular buckthorn. so we would like to see buckthorn and invasivespecies management plan move forward. and i'm happy to take any questions, but iwill stop there. would you call the next delegation? //our next delegation is karen brock, alsofrom the oakvillegreen conservation association to speak to the private tree protection bylaw.

//mayor burton:welcome, ms. brock. //good evening. i'm delighted to be here tonight. so thank you. we have been waiting for this to come to council,so it's an exciting day. my name is karen brock and i'm representingoakvillegreen conservation association and its members. oakvillegreen is a long time community group,as most of you know, dead indicated to protecting

dedicated to protecting trees and enhancinggreen space in oakville. first of all i want to stress our gratitudeto staff, in particular darnell lambert, chris mark, and little hashimi who have spent countlesstime to hear from those in the community. thank you for listening to our concerns andrecommendation. way back in january 14 oakvillegreen submittedrecommendations to the town, signed by 8 other residents associations. after several meetings and discussions, ourcollective group shared nothing but extreme concern about continued tree loss in our neighbourhoods. and i think you have already heard from oneof the groups tonight.

oakville supports the long awaited changesto the private tree protection by law as dr. casimirri outlined. the proposed changes make the tree by laweasier to understand, and i think that's very critical. it would be more effective in protecting treesover 15 centimeters or 6 inches diameter on private property. we commend the town for tracking the treeremoval data since implementing the current tree protection by law in 2008. and i think that was the plan: okay, now thatwe've got a by law in place, let's start tracking

some of this information. but despite best intentions to protect trees,our town is actually losing thousands of healthy trees annually. most trees were removed without any replantingor compensation requirements. oakville's can by cover as measured by thetown's own statistics has decreased by 1% or approximately 20,000 trees through thefree notification process. to me, this proves that be the current bylaw is not being effect that the current by law is not being effective. i know that mayor burton and council are committedto a 40% canopy cover by 20 and implement

the proposed changes as soon as possible. oakvillegreen, as dr. casimirri said, workshard alongside citizens and the town in planting trees and shrubs and we've planted 20,000trees and shrubs since 2004 but i see no end to the loss of canopy unless we get by lawchanges approved as quickly as possible. trees are a community asset and as mayor burtonsays, we're a strong community. and just as clean air and clean water areimportant, so are trees. trees need the same types of protections weput in place to keep our air and water healthy for all our citizens. whether they're on municipal land, privateland, school properties, provincial land,

trees all work to improve our local environmentand are all deserving of equal protection, no matter where they live. and just i guess this is for the 2017 budgetconsiderations, i believe that will be one of the next steps. why should we be spending our money on urbanforests? i know there are lots of demands on the taxpayers'dollars. investing in our urban forest and green infrastructuremy favourite kind gives an impressive return on investment. the green infrastructure ontario coalitionquoted from the recent td economic special

report that's included, i believe, in tonight'sappendix a or it has been. and i quote: toronto's urban forest providesresidents with over $80 million worth of environmental benefits and cost savings. this means that for every dollar spent onannual maintenance, toronto's urban forest returns $1.35 to $3.20 worth of benefits andcost savings each year. and thanks to oakville's 2015 i tree assessment,we know that the replacement value of oakville's urban forest is $1.02 billion and that thevalue of annual environmental services it provides is almost $3 million. evidence in other jurisdictions shows therewill be a meaningful payback for the town

for any incremental expenses incurred in amendingthe tree by law. trees moderate stormwater run off, decreasingthe need for costly stormwater control and treatment facilities. urban forest planting, maintenance and protectionare also less expensive than traditional stormwater management practices. many u.s. municipalities have conducted cost/benefitanalyses and elected to spend millions on green infrastructure projects, instead ofbillions on expanding treatment capacity and storage within their sewer systems. and as most of you know, there are numerousissues facing our urban forests.

these are things we have no control over. emerald ash borer being one. but private tree regulation is something thatwe can control. green infrastructure ontario summarized oururban forests are under threat and emerald ash borer infestation is currently wreakinghavoc across southern ontario and we've seen it here in oakville. urban trees also face increasingly difficultgrowing conditions including denser built urban areas and nutrient deficient soils andland development. and in oakville alone, eab potentially couldkill 200,000 ash trees from our backyards,

streets and parks. and i was excited to see in the environmentalgoals for council that there are lots of environmental targets, and looking to look at tree plantingincentives. so that is wonderful. so i know oakville is a leader. municipal and provincial leadership is neededto help ontario communities grow mature, diverse and healthy urban forests that can help addressthe extreme weather and urban heat issues associated with climate change. and it's here.

and there are some examples cited about thegta's july 23013 flooding that cost insurers 2013 flooding that cost insurers. and our halton neighbours and burlington suffereddramatic flooding losses on so regarding budget approval for one and a half full time equivalentpositions i hope that the above information and stats will convince the budget committeeto approve the additional one and a half full time equivalents of staff to successfullyimplement the newly proposed by law changes and protect our hard working urban trees. in closing, it's becoming clear that it'sharder and harder for trees to withstand climate change pressures.

newly planted trees struggled this summerand the temperatures and drought we had this summer are the new normal. and new tree survival is going to prove moredifficult. bottom line: we have to protect the treesthat we have. a revamped tree protection by law as proposedwill be vastly more effective. //mayor burton:thank you very much for yourinformation and your kind remarks. are there questions for oakvillegreen? thank you very much. madame clerk, would you call the next delegation?

//the next delegation is bob laughlin, herefrom the oakville lakeside residents association to also speak to the private tree protectionby law. //mayor burton:welcome, mr. laughlin. as you heard, my name is bob laughlin. i live at 468 lakeshore road east and i'mhere this evening on behalf of the lakeside oakville residents association. olra supports the provisions of the privatetree by law contained in the staff report. we congratulate and thank chris mark and darnelllambert for the way in which they organized

such effective public consultation to reachthe proposed amendment that is before you tonight. is it perfect? there's still work to be done but it's prettydarn close and well worth supporting as it's currently written. orla is particularly happy to see the proposaleliminate the notification process by which anyone four trees per calendar year that areless than 76 centimeters diameter at breast height. if we imagine that someone cut four treeson december 31st, they could go out on january

the 1st and take down another four trees. so a total of 8 trees over two days and theonly requirement was to fax notification to the town before starting up the chain saw. canopy loss through the notification processwas 250,473 square metres over the last five years. whereas the canopy lost from permits issuedfor tree removal for the fifth tree in a calendar year or any tree over 76 centimeters diameterat breast height amounted to only 5,852 square metres. bringing everything under a permitting processwill still see measurable canopy loss but

almost certainly less than under the presentnotification system. there's an opportunity for town forestry staffto discuss the removal with the homeowner and perhaps find an alternative approach thatwould not require the tree to be removed. provision is made in the proposed new by lawfor the town to request canopy replacement at the rate of one tree for every 10 centimetersof diameter at breast height of the removed tree. again, orla applauds staff and the proposalthey are making and would urge council to pass the amendment to the current by law assoon as possible. councillor elgar?

mr. laughlin//mr. laughlin, you mentioned how many trees thatwere cut that had permits. can you put it in acres as to how many treesthe total canopy loss, excluding all of the emerald ash borer trees that there are a numberof that have been cut? //i think you did that at the community servicescommittee and got to a number of 60 acres. and i'm not quarreling with you. i haven't done the math. but 260,000 square metres is a lot of canopy.

//yes, 61.89 acres. and our tree by law up until this point onlyit was 1.76 acres, right? so there's a lot of work to be done? //absolutely. //i thank you. //mayor burton:madame clerk, would you callthe next delegation? //the next delegation is harmanjot garchahere to speak regarding the sixth line pavement marking. garcha.

council looks forward to your presentation. //good evening, mr. mayor, and the council in the chamber. my name is actually manjot singh. so i'm the person after this, but i'm speakingon behalf of ms. garcha and 65 other residents. i have a copy of the letter and we gave apetition of 66 individuals who have signed against the current markings 7 would you like,i will start. i'm here today on behalf of 66 residents ofsixth line who signed a petition opposing

the change of current markings that were implementedof december 2013 on sixth line from dundas to upper middle. we the street residents would like the lanemarkings to be reverted back to the prior street markings. there's a couple of key points. i was here last week and there was a presentationthat we went through. i would like to address a couple of pointsfrom within. there are six key points. the first one is the cost.

we were told that it would cost the city $28,000to have the markings reverted back to the ones as before. we're not asking for the whole street. we're asking for munn's avenue to upper middleand it should not cost 28,000. but more of a point is we spent 28,000 or30,000, close to that, without consulting the residents of sixth line and it doesn'tseem like it was done in our trust. what did it actually yield? it was disappointment for a lot of residents. and we saw in the presentation there was adecrease of three kilometers an hour in certain

areas and in certain areas there were no changeswhatsoever. so next key point marking. there's literally no need for parking on sixthline. all the houses from upper middle to munn'savenue are fairly big and they have four spots for cars in the driveway and 2 car garages. so i don't think anyone has more cars. and if you walk past sixth line or drive bysixth line you will merely see a single car parked on the entire street. next thing is speed.

the main issue was brought up that the changeswere implemented because of the speed that was calculated at 61 kilometers an hour. my previous point in certain areas it hasbeen calculated at 58 right now. and in certain areas it remains 61. and it seems like $30,000 is a lot of moneyto make a change for three kilometers an hour. next point is wait times. and no survey can deduct that unless you'reactually one of the residents. no survey will tell you how much time or howlong we wait in our driveways to get back on the street, especially as a gentleman broughtup earlier from a resident of sixth line brought

up earlier that if we're especially goingopposite to the traffic, if we're going up north it takes us easily in minutes and i'mtalking minutes sometimes it could be a little less. it could be a minute. it could be 15 seconds. at times it could be five minutes, easily. and especially in the mornings when all ofus go to work. the next point was that you will hear peopleconstantly honking because there's no middle lane.

there used to be a middle lane, prior. so people have to wait on the street to turnto their houses. and you'll see people honking and there willbe a block of cars behind them waiting to go past. what those people use is the so called parkinglanes right now. so people use those to swerve past. the next thing is we have a lot of seniorcitizens and young drivers on our street and we had a couple of gentlemen messenger speakin the last meeting as well. and it just it's very chaotic for them.

we have two senior buildings and then plentyof kids on the street. another issue was brought up was we made changesbecause of bikes. or bike lanes. we love bikes. we all ride bikes. and it's summertime. you'll see people going in flocks and flocks,going up sixth line or down six the line. we never wanted the bike lanes to be removed. we loved them as they were before.

we have been using them for the last years. we never had a complaint. and i don't know who would have complained. maybe a non resident of six the line mighthave complained because they had some trouble sometimes. but we never had any trouble. so we love bikes. and we had bike lanes prior as well and wewould still like them to be reinstated. then the last point it took us a year andten months to have this meeting.

this was done in december and it was reportedback to our designated ward members and ward councillors. and they have been very supportive in thiswhole cause. but for them to have this meeting take place,it took us one year and ten months, which seems like an awfully long time. and last when i was here last week, a coupleof issues were brought up. one is we're not getting that many complaints. come on! who would keep complaining?

we don't want to write a letter every weekfor the next year and a half year and ten months, as a matter of fact. we did raise the issue and we raised it tothe designated councillors and they have been very supportive on that. they said we're getting a team together sothere's no sense in complaining again and again. so one point that was brought up, the complaintsare reduced. another point that was brought up, made byone of the council members that these changes have been implemented on other streets.

and what's technically, what's your problem? this has been done on well, they didn't saythat. of course not. but this has been done on even when we callin december of 2014, we were told, oh, this was done on eighth line, notting hill gate. you'll get used to that. that doesn't seem right for an elected memberto say that or anyone to see that. we hope that our view counts, or our opinioncounts. that's why we're here.

then there's i would like to end this withjust three points: no one that i know of or anyone that we have talked to among the 6members, residents or anyone the 66 members, residents or anyone they know of, no one hadknowledge of speeding from munn's to upper middle. no one needed street parking. none of the residents had problems with bikelanes before. we love bikes and we would like to ride bikesagain. and my last statement would be excuse me,and my apologies if it does sound rude and i don't mean to be that way but the town ofoakville should have cared to ask the street

residents before spending $30,000 of our taxmoney. does the opinion of the very street not matter? we don't want to feel unsafe going in andout of our driveways. we certainly don't need the extra designatedparking on the street. the houses have large enough driveways andthe townhouses, senior buildings have extra visitor parking on in their complexes. //mayor burton:thank you for a very much,very good presentation. //thank you, sir. //mayor burton:you might have aroused a coupleof questions.

i will say that it feels unfair to hear thatyour ward councillors tell you that, we're on it, you don't need to complain. and then if someone uses that against you,that's got to feel unfair. //it does. //mayor burton:i sympathize with you on that. councillor knoll? //thank you, your worship. while maybe staff aren't hearing the complaints,we're certainly hearing the complaints on a regular basis, both by phone, email andeven in person.

thank you for your earnings today. it was very concise. could you tell me about the demographic makeupof your street? my observation is over the years i have beencouncillor there for quite a long time it's a fairly i'm not going to say "elderly street"but there's a lot of senior citizens that live on that street. in your opinion, do you think that this changeand this traffic issue would have a stronger impact or a harder impact on those individuals? //absolutely, yes, sir.and again, i certainly want to start off by

thanking you, and you have been very supportivesince day one, you and mr. grant. and you also care to listen to our opinionsand actually emailed us back on called or called us back. yes, absolutely true. we have a lot of senior citizens. and the demographics would normally lie from4 to i would from 40 to 65. when you're including the seniors building,there's a lot of seniors in the building. we don't have that many young people.

but we still do. it becomes extremely hard for them to lookback and this way and that way and getting on the street is a hassle. //can you maybe describe some of the issuesaround the fact that the road actually i don't know, some of my colleagues maybe in the southmaybe aren't on six the line as often as those of us who live up there, but could you maybedescribe the orientation of the street in terms of the it's not a straight street. and that does that i don't want to lead thewitness there but does that create any additional challenges in your mind?

//i'm very glad that you brought that up. i missed that point. thank you so much. this was an issue raised by a lot of people. so especially from river oaks and sixth linethere's a bit of a curve around the street. when we actually had the middle lane, we couldgo in the middle lane and wait, especially for cars coming either way. we could wait and okay, we're able to moveand proceed in such manner. but especially when we're backing out of ourdriveways and some of our folks have started

to park their the other way around becauseit their cars the other way around because it makes it a little bit easier. but nonetheless that curve completely blocksour view thank you, sir. thank you for bringing that up. //would that delay your ability to be ableto back out? would that add to the time to be able to maneuverout of the driveway? //yes, sir. not only that. we don't have to delay.

i'll say that. we could merge on the street right away. but that would result in accidents. plus we don't want to be involved in an accidentof any sort. even the bikes coming down that way, our viewis blocked of those bikes. of any trees on there we love trees. again, we don't want anything done with those. but i'm just saying that the view is blockedand the middle lanes permitted us actually just to settle down, absorb ourselves fora second.

okay, now we're okay to move on the street. it could be for people turning left or right,especially around 5 o'clock at night, or evening, and 7 in the morning, 8 in the morning, you'llsee a whole bunch of people just waiting behind someone because they're turning either toone of the townhouses buildings, either to one of the senior buildings or especiallythe sixth line plaza which is a fairly small plaza but caters to all the residents. all the local residents. //thank you very much. i appreciate your time and your presentation.

//may i? //mayor burton:councillor elgar? //actually my question is of staff, not theperson presenting right now. //mayor burton:then mr. singh, thank you very much for your presentation. .thank you, sir. we did spend a lot of time on this at communityservices and i'm glad we did. and i wonder if staff can advise me whetherthey made a mistake doing the active transportation plan that everybody agreed to in 2013, becausetonight i have heard that we have designed

a street that blocks view and is very dangerousand i want to know whether that in fact is true. mayor, the active transportation master planwas completed in 2009 and identified sixth line as a major route for cycling connectingboth locations within the town and connecting us to the broader region. the use of dedicated bicycle lanes is an appropriatemeans of providing space for cyclists. and that's a method that we've used on otherstreets, similar streets within the town as well. i feel that designated bicycle lanes are anappropriate means of providing space for bicycles.

//so in your opinion and you're the trafficspecialist you don't believe that we've created a dangerous issue with regard to sixth line? because that's what i'm hearing and i wantto make sure that that is not true. mayor, i think there are a couple of questionsin there. with respect to cycling infrastructure, designatedbicycle lanes are a safe way to for bicycles, bicyclists to travel. and sixth line is a very important route. what we're hearing is that the removal ofthe centre turn lane which allowed us to implement the bike lane is the issue that residentsare having.

so it's not the bike lanes. it's the fact that there's only so much spacebetween the curves and it's the way that we chose to allocate that space that's comingup as the concern. the traffic calming program that was in placeprior to next spring incorporated passive traffic calming as the primary method foraddressing streets such as sixth line, major collectors and minor arterials, where thetraffic speeds were above the threshold that was designated. so above 61 kilometers an hour in this case. the approved traffic calming mechanism ormethod was to provide to remove the centre

turn lane and replace that with two travellanes, one in each direction for cars, one in each direction for bicycles, and the extraspace was used for on street parking. so it's not a matter of the bike lanes beingunsafe or of the choice of bike lanes being unsafe. i think the question is whether or not residentsfeel safer having that space that the centre turn lane provided them, so that they couldstop and pause, as the previous speaker mentioned, before merging into an active traffic lane. //okay. i appreciate that.

right now we are going to do another activetransportation master plan study, going forward? mayor, that's correct. the active transportation master plan updateis ongoing and we have public consultation events planned for this thursday as one stepin that process. the plan will come before you early in 2017for your approval. //which brings me to my last question, whichgoes to the first question: we heard tonight that the public was excluded all input. were there was there ever any public engagementrelated to our last active transportation master plan?

mayor, yes, there was public consultationas part of the 2009 active representation master plan and the transportation masterplan itself shifting gears. the for the passive traffic calming program,that was approved there was a list of projects that were approved. residents were notified in advance of eachof the projects that were to be implemented. i can't say that that would constitute consultationon that. that predates my time with the town but ican say that everyone within that stretch of the street was provided with a letter thatshowed them what the proposed changes to the road would be.

//i thank you for the information. thanks. //mayor burton:so there's a lot of interestin this topic and i'm running two lists. first timers and second time speakers andquestioners. and the next councillor to be recognized iscouncillor grant. //thank you.and given that we keep talking about the active transportation master plan and cycling, ifi could call you back up i'm sorry. could you tell me what the width of the cyclelanes are right now with the 2 lane configuration? or i could tell you, if you would like.

mayor, they're in the report. i believe it's 1.75 metres. //when we had three lanes on that street,what was the width of the cycle rain? //they were edged lane and they were 1.8 metresbut they were used as a signed bicycle route. //therefore, if we were to return to the 3lane configuration, we would still have 1.8 metres to work with in order for a safe bicyclelane? mayor, the difference between the bike lanesand the bike route is that parking was allowed over top of those edged lines at certain timesof the day. today the parking is in a separate space.

and so the bike lanes should be clear at alltimes for cyclists. those are the two differences. //but again if we don't have parking on thatstreet at all from munn's down to upper middle, then we're//through you, mr. mayor, if the parking was removed, then yes,there could be bike lanes. //and i appreciate you letting me do committeework at council. //mayor burton:let me just try this on socouncillor duddeck is next, then councillor lishchyna and then councillor lapworth andthen councillor knoll. but it sounds to me as your chair that we'rereally sort of debating the item and we haven't

even separated it yet. so how do you feel about moving to see ifit's separated, and then having the debate? rather than having it now. because that was the last of the delegations. and i'll keep the same list that i have here. so then on the so that brings us to the standingcommittee reports on asc, is there a mover and seconder for that report? councillor knoll moves it. councillor gittings seconds it.

all those in favour? asc passed. good work, asc. on csc, i gather we want to separate thisitem, item 5. do we have a mover and seconder for the balance? //your worship, i would like to separate thetree by law for a recorded vote. //mayor burton:all right. so we're separating let me just catch up here. we're separating item and item 5.

and councillor adams has moved the balance. i'm looking for a seconder. councillor o'meara. all those? favour? that's carried. now, is there discussion on the tree by law? //no, no discussion. i just wanted the recorded vote.

//mayor burton:will the same mover and seconderbe moving the tree by law? then to be recognized that's a "yes". so to be recognized on this vote, i'll firstcall the "yesses". those in favour please stand to be named. oh, my goodness, look at that. lishchyna mayor burton, gittings, chisholm,duddeck and o'meara. i won't call the negatives. there doesn't seem to be any. congratulations, everyone.

we didn't have that much unanimity when wepassed the first one. //discern. //mayor burton:now,. //(indiscernible). //mayor burton:now, item number 5. councillor duddeck, you're next. //thank you, mr. mayor. perhaps we would benefit from having jillpresent her presentation for the benefit.

there seems to be a misunderstanding thatthis is solely about the bike lanes but there is definitely a traffic calming componentdue to safety concerns, in the 85 percentile. i don't know i just think it would be helpfulfor those who are sitting in and watching, to get the full//mayor burton:got it. anything else? because certainly on anyone's request we'refree to do that. councillor lishchyna? //mine is just a follow up question for jill,with respect to what councillor grant said about the parking.

do we have any count of how often the streetparking is used? we heard in the presentation that the residentsdon't need it. so who is parking there? mayor, no, i don't have numbers or daily//i have to interrupt. //excuse me, you can't. //i'm sorry, but i'm listening to everybodybeing so approval //sir//yes, but i'm a visitor right now and i live here for 20 years, and i cannot sit here andlisten any longer to all the that is coming from//(indiscernible).

//okay, she said she doesn't know. and i know. //but you don't give anybody a chance! you listened. the other person listened. you don't give anybody a chance. so i have to interrupt. because this is my responsibility as a citizen. are you giving me a chance?

you let me sit down and then you direct mewhen. //mayor burton:(indiscernible). //because she said she doesn't know. //i don't have to learn because i lived heresince 1985. you were not mayor yet.and i was living here and i have seen what is happening. and it is happening wrong. //mayor burton:if you want to be ejected,keep interrupting. otherwise please (indiscernible).

//okay, so you direct me when i can speak. //mayor burton:councillor lapworth? a question for staff. sixth line north of upper middle, there'sa school. and i'm just in calculating your 61 kilometersper hour, was that calculated inside of school hours or outside of school hours or is ita mean average in the middle? //the calculate the speeds are based on either24 or 48 hour traffic counts. it would at least one full day's worth ofcounts, if not two hours and an average over the speed that's presented in the report isthe 85th percentile speed.

so 85% of traffic is travelling travellingat or below that speed. //mayor burton:councillor knoll, it's yourturn. //councillor duddeck is gesticulating wildly//go ahead. //my first question is with respect to theproposal that was suggested at csc and defeated, which is to a modification of number 1 whichis to change the lanes from upper middle to munn's, can you help us understand, does thatin your opinion does that cons tight any kind of safety issue? mayor, the pavement markings that are in placetoday are representative of what was approved through the passive traffic calming program.

they are in place to try and reduce the operatingspeed of the road and, through that, allowed us to also take that reallocated space andprovide on street parking and bike lanes. we do not have collision history based onthe last year to say that the change are unsafe. i am very hesitant to use the words "safe"and "unsafe" or "safer" and "less safe," for example. the road, prior to the changes, was designedto appropriate municipal standards. it just didn't meet the traffic calming lanemarkings that have been prove put in place and recommended on similar streets. so to return the pavement markings would beto say that the passive traffic calming was

not required on that street. it would not be a commentary orr on safe orunsafe, or more safe or less safe. //so let me approach from a different position. before the tmp was in place and the decisionwas made to proceed with the new lane changes, was there at that time any kind of historyof collisions or problems that were to be addressed? was that part of the was that part of therationale for making the changes? mayor, this was a passive traffic calmingprogram. it was not a collision reduction program.

it was based on operating speed of the roadway. so let me take this a little bit further,then. so if we were we were not addressing any potentialsafety issues in terms of collisions. now, in terms of the success of the program. before it was in the 85th percentile. after, it appears it's also in the 85th percentilewith a slight difference in kilometers per hour. depending on where you were on the streetit was between 1 and 3 kilometers an hour difference.

is that accurate? //that's correct. //is that a significant improvement? or is it potentially even a rounding error? mayor, it's within what we would expect tosee with passive traffic calming. passive traffic calming is not typically wedo not see typically the same dramatic changes in speed reduction as we would with a physicalmeasure, which forces somebody to slow down because they may because they have to moveover or around an obstacle. //so i have asked about the safety issue.

and that wasn't the issue in terms of theit wasn't done to respond to safety concerns with respect to collisions. we have had a minor change in the number ofnumber of kilometers per hour in terms of the most recent test. what about the issue around volumes? did you do any testing around volumes? did it change volumes of traffic on the street? mayor, we did with our speed counts we doalso look at volumes. the volumes are within the range that we wouldexpect on that type of road.

with trafalgar sort of out of commission atpoints last year and this year, when we were doing our speed surveys, i'm hesitant to providetoo much commentary on the volume because i think it would be//that would skew it, obviously. so okay, so we've identified the safety one. what about the issue around, again i knowthis was done as a result of the master plan. was there any substantial evidence of concernregarding speed on that portion of sixth line that councillor grant and i are mostly addressingat this moment? did you have any kind of citizen registryof complaints on that issue? mayor, it was the our speed survey programwhich put the street on the list.

and as we worked our way through the listand in implementing passive traffic calming, we did have concerns with respect to speedand with respect to vehicles using the centre turn lane inappropriately, and those can bothbe addressed through passive traffic calming. //i understand that. but we didn't have any constituent concerns. there wasn't any kind of outcry or petitionsor anything from constituents to say the road is too fast, or the road is a problem, upto that point. correct? mayor, we did receive some complaints overtime but we received complaints on just about

every road that the speed is too fast. //true. it would probably be surprising if you didn'treceive a complaint. in terms of costs, we know to return the entiresixth line to the original configuration is $28,000. what's the cost to return only the portionfrom upper middle to munn's? mayor, it's approximately $20,000, i believe. it's not a 50/50 split in terms of the length,even though the length is approximately half. it's due to the amount of paint and signsthat are in that stretch, and just the overall

getting folks out there to do the work. you can't just divide the cost in half. //that's all i have for now, your worship. i do have comments when we come to motiontime. //mayor burton:councillor duddeck? //mayor burton:well, then, let's do that now. ms. stephens, are you prepared to unfurl yourpresentation? //can we access podium user?

this is the same presentation i made at committee,so the date is a little off from today. so sixth line was previously identified asqualifying for passive traffic calming based on the observe 85th percentile speeds as we'vejust mentioned. in september of 2014 this stretch of sixthline and upper middle road in glenashton was resurfaced. at that time we re striped the road to providethose traffic calming measures. in december of that year we were asked toreport back to council on the steps necessary to return sixth line to its pre 2014 configurationof three lanes for motorized vehicles and two lanes for bicycles.

so we prepared the report for csc that wenton tuesday. i'll show this in photographs in just a momentbut this is a graphical representation of what the pavement markings looked like before. we had the 1.8 meter edge lines as we've mentioned,3.7 wide travel lanes and a centre turn lane. the current pavement markings consist of parkinglanes on either side, a 1.75 meter bicycle lane and 3.25 meter wide motorized vehiclelanes. this is sixth line at (indiscernible) glenschool before the pavement markings were put in place. this is the same or a similar location thisyear.

this is northbound sixth line again but furthernorth by holy trinity before the pavement markings were changed and this is a similarstretch of the road to today. so you can see how the pavement markings havechanged with the removal of the centre turn lane, the addition of the parking, and theaddition of the bike lanes. one of the reasons that we took the extratime before reporting back to committee and council was to allow us to do some monitoringof the speeds to see whether those had changed as a result of the implementation of the passivetraffic calming measures. as is outlined in the report, the passivetraffic calming is implemented when the operating speeds are 61 or higher.

in the case you can see now, based on thespeed surveys that we conducted in 2015 and 2016 that the operating speeds are between58 and 61. so there have been some changes, and someareas are remaining the same or close to the same. so the staff report, as i mentioned, was asa result of a request to staff to report back. and the request was that we review the pavementmarkings sorry, my apologies. the recommendation of today's report is thatthe pavement markings as detailed in the report be received. the report discussed two options.

reintroducing the pavement markings to thepre 2014 condition or maintaining the current pavement marking plan. we did also, though, talk about a hybrid optionwhich has been mentioned by the ward 5 councillors tonight already and that would be to leavethe northerly section as it is, and the southerly section would be returned to the pre 2014condition. by reintroducing the pavement markings, thisstretch of sixth line becomes a bike route instead of having designated bike lanes. the active transportation master plan showsthis as being a route that would have bike lanes.

as i mentioned before, the key differencehere is that before, when it was a bike route there was some parking allowed over top ofthe bike space and bike lanes are designated facilities that are available full time. but the previous pavement markings, therewas some onsite parking permitted with some peak hour restrictions and that parking tookplace within the edged lines and a portion of the travel lane which was the space thatwas used by bicycles prior to the changes. with the previous pavement markings reintroducedthere are limited options for additional traffic calming if it was determined that trafficcalming is required and the estimated cost to return the full section is $28,000 andi mentioned earlier it is approximately $20,000

to do the smaller portion. if we maintain the current pavement markingsas they are, that's consistent with our passive traffic calming and the way we have it's alsoconsistent with the active transportation master plan and the ongoing update and therecommendations that have been drafted so far for that. and obviously there is no cost. and the hybrid option is a combination ofthose two, as i have mentioned. so the direction that was provided to staffin 2014 was to report back to council on the steps necessary to return sixth line fromupper middle road to dundas to its pre 2014

configuration of three lanes for motorizedvehicles and two lanes for bicycles. staff recommended that the report that wentto csc be received and that we would need direction if changes to those pavement markingswere required. that concludes the presentation. //mayor burton:thank you very much. are there any questions for ms. stephens? i have one, then: there are? councillor chisholm?

councillor gittings? //through you, your worship, are they parkingstalls or are they just lines on the road? it went too quickly. if we can get back to that, i would like to,on the visual, to look at that. okay. so what's the set back from the parking fromthe driveway that some of the residents are so concerned about, i believe, sight lines. is there a setback between the driveways? mayor, parking is not allowed within one meterof a municipal of a driveway, according to

our by laws. but what i'm asking: are there markings onthe road for that? or it's a free for all? mayor, no, we did look at markings. there are areas where to provide the leftturn lane we had to adjust the markings so that would justed a adjust the parking space. so yes, that was all considered. mayor, through you, jill, you mentioned thatthere were examples of motorists using the centre turn lane inappropriately.

could you just paint a little picture of thatfor me, in terms of what kinds of actions. mayor, examples of that would be impatientdrivers trying to get around and get where they wanted to go faster than the folks whowere in the driving properly would let those folks behind them get. so they could be coming out and using thatas a passing lane or an acceleration lane to get to the left turn opportunity. //mayor burton:ms. stephens, can i ask you about the provisionof parking on the street? in these different options, is there a requirementon council to provide parking on that street?

i thought i heard the residents to say theydidn't need marking on the street. i had the sense from the report and againthat we have to have parking. can you shed some light on that? mayor, i would say that no, there's no requirementto have parking. we have no done any consultation with residentsto ask them whether or not they would like that parking. we know that sometimes it is used. we've heard from the residents that are heretoday that it's not used as often as it is on many other streets where they don't havethe ability to park in their driveways or

garages. but what we try to do with this set of pavementmarkings is allocate the space so that there are fewer opportunities for folks to speed,to try and duck around folks. so by providing a dedicated space for cycleand a dedicated space for parking, it's hoped that drivers will respect what is meant bythe lane markings and they'll stay where they're supposed to be for the purposes that they'rethere. that's one of the reasons we narrowed thedriving lanes as well. //mayor burton:i think what we have heardtonight is that we had objectives with regard to this effort that we did, number one.and number two, i'm not sure that we achieved

much change with regard to getting objectives. and the second thing i think i heard you allowwas that we couldn't really say the residents had been consulted. more like notified. and third, we heard from the residents thatit sounds like all of them but more than 60 have found their convenience reduced by ourefforts on their behalf. that's the way it sums up for me.and i'm taking you for agreeing with that. that's your chance to say no, i distortedyou, if i did. but i think i've got you.

mayor, no, that's accurate. i would just add, if i may, that when we changedthe traffic calming procedure in 2008 we as staff were permitted to do more notificationthan consultation with the understanding that traffic calming was something we were doingfor our residents. and so that we did follow the procedures thatwere in place at the time. our new procedure does add that consultationback in. //mayor burton:okay. so in that spirit, would staff welcome anopportunity to review this matter with real plucks public consultation with the residentsto see what the best way to achieve everyone's

objectives are? rather than council make a decision tonight,would it be the best outcome to ask staff to have a consultative approach with the residents? or would council continue to recommend thatwe just receive the report? mayor, we do have opportunities to consulton the bike lane, the bike route component of this through the active transportationmaster plan that's coming up thursday. if we were implementing this today under ournew process, it would be definitely a consultative we certainly have heard the comments thathave come out from the public. my concern is we want to just ensure thatwe are addressing any technical needs that

we've come across, whether they are trafficcalming related, and the active transportation component, we will be continuing to recommendthe bike lanes through the atmp update. so with that understanding, then, certainly. //mayor burton:councillor duddeck, you appearto want the floor. and so does mr. green. do you want to go before or after mr. green? //through you, your worship, i think at thispoint and as you know, i do live not far from

the area. i think the pavement marking actually worksreally well. you have heard the issues of the public, though,and it sounds like there's a considerable number, according to the petition. so i think really going through another setof consultation i'm not sure on this would actually change staff's mind versus the residents. so i believe it would be best decided by council. //mayor burton:thank you, mr. councillor duddeck?

and i guess, building on that, i concur withwhat cao green had just said. i guess my concern would be if we did go toa consultative process, how do we reinforce the safety, the speeding? like, those are warrants that we have to havedue regard for. in other words it's not a case of pickingand choosing based on what somebody says they like this or they like that. we look at it through the lens of what's inthe best interests for the entire community. what's the safest way to slow down the speedwithout doing, as you say, the more intrusive median, things of that nature.

and it sounds like the traffic calming isdoing what it's supposed to be doing. and we do have a designated bike route versusor bike lane, rather, than a bike route. so i'll just leave that. that wasn't really a question but i appreciatethat. //mayor burton:thank you, councillor duddeck. let's see. hands, please? so councillor adams as a first timer, so councilloradams. //he picked me!

to what degree has the cycling community beenconsulted on a potential change back to the original format? //if at all? mayor, the cycling community itself has notbeen consulted on this. we have spoken with the consultants from ouractive transportation master plan update and they are continuing to recommend that thisroad have cycling lanes. //so we don't have anybody here from the cyclingcommunity because nobody in the cycling community thinks that we're thinking of changing this. so to make a decision to go back, withoutconsulting another group of oakvillians, i

think would also in a way also be unfair. so i'll leave that point. //mayor burton:councillor grant? //so let's circle back to what i was tryingto get through earlier. a hard cycle lane is a form of active transportationmaster plan and it's also traffic calming, is it not? mayor, a designated bicycle lane is used forboth of those purposes, yes. //and the motion that i had made last mondaywas the fact or tuesday, sorry. i forgot thanksgiving.

it was the fact that we want to keep it asa cycle lane. i know a number of cyclists who do use that. we've already heard that parking is not anecessity in the area. so it turn the entire area or at least tomake sure that 1.8 metres is a hard cycle lane is really what i was trying to get to. in fact i have spoken to mr. clapham earlier in the month about tryingto get green paint down the side of the street, so we can make sure the drivers understand,much like they have aren't the ninth lane area, so they understand this is a like slain.

you're not supposed to be driving in thatarea. if we were to implement something like that,that would also be a form of traffic calming. mayor, yes, cycling lanes are used as trafficcalming or to be used as traffic calming. it's that extra space and what do we do withit? does that allow us to also reduce speeds. that's the question. //and certainly when we're talking about returningto a 3 lane configuration we can certainly also consider the fact that we can make thelanes a little bit larger by reducing the

lanes for the cars. mayor, the cycling lanes? making those wider? //mayor burton:councillor elgar and then councillorlishchyna. //i'm not sure where we're going with thisbut either we go with the master plan or we quit working on the 2016/2017 master planwhich is costing thousands of dollars to do, to do it accurately. read the report from the traffic experts. i'm not a qualified traffic expert but i doread that they were saying that the previous

pavement markings does not conform to thetown's traffic calming procedure. if you go through the report again, they highlightlike, it doesn't meet the "livable oakville" plan. it doesn't meet the active transportationmaster plan and we're sitting here piecemealing then as a councillor i say we forget aboutall these transportation plans until we get the fundamentals right. when we get to vote, if we vote to changeit back, then we should put a full stop on the active transportation plan going forwardalso, because the piecemeal approach doesn't work for consistency and i think you saidthe other night, another reason you need consistency

of flow on the street, so the people knowwhat markings mean. and that is given the consistency. and i really can't believe that we're spendingthis long and it's good that we are but we have to come together on whether we're seriousabout an active transportation plan or we're not. so i look forward to the vote and we'll havea record vote, because i'm going to ask the mayor for that for sure. and we'll see where it goes. but i thank you for your report.

i know that you've done a lot of work on it.and it's not easy. so these are hard decisions we're going tohave to make. //mayor burton:councillor lishchyna? //i just wanted to echo councillor grant inthat we're not talking about removing cycling and in our ward we do have sections wherethey are very nicely marked with green, and in another section there's not enough to havethe car and a full space for the bicycle with the green lane. so it's not continuous throughout the townand every road. so considering what's happening in this sectionand i walk that area as well when i cross

the boundary from ward 6 to ward 5, that endingright by upper middle where the curve of the road it sometimes does scare me when there'snot a middle lane to get out and take a pause in order to be able to get back on to theroad in a safe manner. thank you, everyone. i would support an outcome where we had thededicated bike lanes consistent with the active transportation master plan so we wouldn'thave to worry about notifying the bicycling community because they would still have thelanes they have now. and i would support a package, i guess, thatwould restore a centre lane, which is what i heard people to say.and i would support removing the parking where

it was necessary to make that work. and then i believe we would be balancing theobjectives of our active transportation master plan, our "livable oakville" plan and allof those things and we would be also respecting the convenience of our residents. i don't really see it as destroying any ofthe principles of the active transportation master plan. my focus is on restoring the convenience ofthe residents with regard to their centre lane and i'm taking their evidence that theydon't want the parking, which would then permit, if anything, bigger bike lanes.

and i had hoped with my suggestion of sendingit for true consultation, we would then also respect the fact that this was done beforewe changed the marching orders of staff and added a requirement for consultation, notnotification. and i thought that staff might be alive tothe possibility of this hybrid hybrid where we keep the active transportation master planbike lanes and all we do is restore the centre lane, and we restore the convenience of theresidents. and the and there, i am done. that's just my preference. i don't have a sense of how it would go.

but i could put my name on a vote like that. i don't know if we've come to the point wherewe're going to be voting or whether you're going to be waiving the procedure by law tolet the gentleman come forward and delegate before we vote on the issue. //mayor burton:we don't have a motion yet. //i will move the recommendations from thecommittee. and if so, i would speak to that. //mayor burton:that's fine. i need a seconder.

councillor elgar seconds it. //we dealt with this at length an at communityservices. it was interesting, your comments, your worship,that you talked about convenience. and i have a problem when it comes to safetyon the road being deemed as convenience. it's the safety of the residents. it's the speed speeding is happening all overoakville. we realize that. what we're trying to do is to mitigate thespeeding issues that are currently happening throughout the town, without being as intrusiveas hard infrastructure to deal with traffic

calming. it's interesting nobody's commented on therotherglen montessori school, that in the body of our report, they had concerns at onepoint. staff worked with them. they no longer have problems with it. so a busy school that is also dealing withsafety of students and parents and families are pleased with it. so let's keep that in mind. because of the discussions that we had thelast week, i made a point of going up past

this area several times. lo and behold there were parking of cars onthat stretch of roadway. so it's not a scientific survey. okay? but i did want it to see whether in fact peopleactually are utilizing the parking lanes that are being provided. and as such, i am still in keeping with ourdecision that we made at committee. i think it's important that safety is paramount. and i would hope that the rest of committeewould support.

//i'm ready for the vote. //mayor burton:councillor knoll? //oh, but not quite yet. so i'm asking members of council to considerdefeating this resolution and let's look at a hybrid between what councillor grant hadproposed and what the mayor is presenting because i think there's a solution in there. i have a number of points that i want to raiseand i'll try to go as quickly as i can but they're all very important. a couple are to respond some things that mycolleague said.

first of all, i live very close and i'm onthis road probably four to six times a day, just the nature of our work. i'm back and forth. i'm there all times of day: during rush hour,during slow times, late at night etc. so i see the various issues on that road. i live them. there's a couple of for really important points. first of all, to be respond to councillorduddeck's point about she sees they park on the street to avoid backing out.

so you actually find residents who will parkon the street in the early morning so they don't have to pack out when it gets busy. if anything, i have seen more parking on thestreet as a result of this. they're trying to mitigate their problemsactually getting out of the car. going on some of the big issues that wereaddressed. the number one issue that we always have toaddress staff has to address, we have to address and everybody has to address is safety. that comes first and foremost, full stop,end of story. one or two kilometers is not really a measurableor demonstrable safety benefit.

in fact, if anything, it could simply be luckof the draw based on time that it was actually done. in fact, the only safety issue that i haveheard demonstrated today is a safety issue that's been raised by the residents who areexpressing serious concern not inconvenience. i hate that word. it's an inconvenient truth. the fact is that the residents are demonstratingthrough the description of their experiences a safety issue and i see that every day andi see people all of a sudden gun it out of the driveway and people screeching to a haltbecause they just get frustrated.

in terms of the centre lane being a lane forpeople to go around cars, they still do that but they are now in the opposing lanes whenyou've got somebody backing out, especially somebody not totally secure in terms of they'renot totally comfortable backing out, they go slow. people are trying to get to their go trainor whatever, they just go around the corner. they don't worry about it. on this issue as a nominal speed decrease,we haven't heard any demonstration. when i asked the director in terms of thesafety issue she wasn't really able to demonstrate any safety issue, either for or against.

so that's my biggest issue. in addition to what we heard from residentsand i started out this question because i have spent a lot of time in 16 years canvassingthis street and meeting our residents and talking to people there are a lot of seniorcitizens on that street. one of the fundamental things that we as acommunity try to do is we always want people to remain in their homes as long as possible. this is a quality of life issue. as soon as you start losing their mobilityand this is a mobility issue. if you can't pull out of your driveway safely,suddenly you start to think about not having

the car. that's a serious concern. as we are aging as a society, and that partof river oaks is there's some original residents still there. so there are seniors there that are very concernedabout this. and i heard about it in spades during theelection, literally it was almost the number one issue for a period of time during thelast election because it just happened to happen during the election. thanks, staff.

but and i don't think a day went by that weweren't pilloried with this as a question. i want to emphasize we're only looking ata portion of the road here. there's really only one portion of the roadthat's substantially impacted. the rest of the road is either a school. they have cross streets that connect. or for that matter the few houses that existbetween trinity school and glenashton actually have the ability they have the garage in theback. so they can actually turn around and pullout in the normal configuration. some do back out so we're really only concernedabout that strip from upper middle road to

munn's. again i asked the residents to describe thisissue and that is the specific orientation of the street with the curve really does createa sight line issue. and i have tried backing out of drivewaysand i have seen that sight line issue. there's certain points along the street wherein some cases you have to do a right out so that you can go north. you have to take a right out and go arounda side street and come back up because you don't have the visibility. when they have the centre lane as councillorgrant pointed out that is solution.

there always has been a bike lane and there'sa solution to maintain that bike lane as you yourself pointed out. thank you for that, your worship. and thank you, marc grant, for raising thatas well. not all roads are alike. i like this i like the changes on some ofthe roads. i think on eighth line it was brilliant. when that came up i remember that back inthe day. and that may even be the road we piloted thison.

in some cases it really works. river glen it really works well too. councillor elgar talked aboutabandoning the whole process. i don't agree with that either. we're not necessarily going to abandon theentire process because we're saying this doesn't work on this road. we're being flexible. glenashton, another one of our roads theypainted sharrows on the road seems to work fine.

there's a lot of bikes on glenashton. i dare say there's more bikes on glenashtonthan on sixth line. it's a very popular bike route. that really is the summary of my most importantpoints. and i'm going to end going back to the beginning,just to remind everybody, because i was long winded here. we are all about safety first. again i want to draw your attention to thefact, when you're voting today, remember that nobody today nobody in the report has reallydemonstrated any significant safety issue.

the only evidence we have on safety, yourworship, today is the evidence that is presented by the residents 60 odd residents which ismore than a majority of residents on that strip have expressed their concern that thisis a safety issue in their mind. so if it's not a demonstrated engineeringsafety issue, it's certainly a safety issue in the minds and hearts of the people wholive on that street, drive on that street, pay taxes on that street and i really thinkthat we should give that some serious consideration. again i ask for your consideration to defeatthis motion and allow us to try a hybrid. [ applause ]//i would be a fool to try and follow that so i'm just going to leave that.

//mayor burton:are there other speakers? then i'll call the vote. all those in favour of councillor duddeck'smotion to uphold the committee please rise to be named. councillor adams, lapworth, elgar, gittings,chisholm, duddeck and o'meara. opposed? lishchyna, grants, knoll, mayor burton. we, the few, the small, have lost. and i declare the motion carried.

council, that brings us to our first consentitem, your oakville enterprises quarterly report and your 2017 council and committeeschedule. and i would ask if you need the there's apresentation from mr. lister for your edification and there's alsoa report already in your package. what's your pleasure? councillor o'meara? //if my colleagues are okay with it, i wouldbe happy to move both consent items without seeing the presentation, if that's//mayor burton:let's see if there's a seconder. councillor adams is your seconder.

//i actually would like to see the presentation. //mayor burton:and you would like to see thepresentation. so you probably didn't want to second thismotion. //i'm happy to second it but i also wouldlike to //mayor burton:sorry, councillor o'meara,your partner has undone you. lister, we welcome you at the podium and welook forward to your presentation. //thank you, mayor burton. good evening, mayor burton, councillors. thank you for the opportunity provide ourquarterly update on oakville hydro this evening.

first i'm going to identify who i have withme tonight. i have jim collins, mike brown, mary caputi,jason garrell. i'm going to ask mary caputi to come forwardand start the presentation. that would be followed by mike brown, chiefoperating officer of oakville hydro. al it will all be available for any questionsif you have any. caputi. we'll clear that off and give you the screen. mayor, town councillors.

this summer has proven to be one of the hottestsummers we can remember. oakville hydro has set record highs in energyconsumption. the recorded data suggests of having comparedto 11 days in the summer of 2015. this increased energy use by the residentsof oakville and businesses of oakville did place a stress on our distribution systemwhich resulted in outages across oakville. however, our robust system and our automatedswitching capabilities was able to ensure our customers had power restored for the mostpart within minutes. in the past month, the residents have nowreceived high electricity bills for their summer usage.

oakville hydro's customer service personnelhave had high volume of calls to address customers' questions and resolve any issues they had. last month the ontario government reactedto the rising cost of electricity which accounts for over 80% of electricity bill and introducedtwo initiatives. the first for residents, an 8% rebate whichis in effect january 1st, 2017. and this is an average al annual savings of$130 per year. for the largest businesses, a conservationincentive whereby businesses benefit by making changes to the way they use their electricity. in addition the province has also mandatedthat all the local distribution companies

ensure that residents have a monthly billby the end of 2016. oakville hydro has converted its systems andhas rolled out the monthly electricity bill beginning mid august. the monthly bill will ensure that residentsbetter manage their electricity costs and their usage behaviours. it is important to note that oakville hydroalso bills water consumption on behalf of the region of halton and those charges willcontinue to be billed every other month. helping customers in need. at the beginning of 2016 the ontario electricitysupport program commenced.

this program is designed to help those inneed on a regular basis. so in oakville there's over 1,000 residentswho are enrolled in the program and receive monthly credits on their bills. what is our focus? service. it is our responsibility to provide a highlevel of service to or residents to our residents and businesses. it is also our responsibility to implement,follow and communicate the electricity initiatives enacted by the province.

reliability, to ensure we have a distributionsystem that is reliable to each and every resident and business 24 hours a day.and when the outages or interruptions do occur, restore the power as quickly as possible. lastly, our rates. to ensure we have affordable distributionrates, in oakville the residents pay just below $28 per month for oakville hydro's services. and that accounts for only 18% of the electricitybill. oakville hydro's last rate increase was only1.65%. what are we doing to conserve energy in oakville?

we continue to deliver conservation programsin oakville. this year there's hundreds of businesses participatingin the program including the town of oakville's led streetlight conversion program. there have been over 6,000 lights installedto date and anticipated to be at 10,000 by the end of the year. this will provide significant savings in energycosts. in addition, this summer oakville hydro waspleased to provide the halton healthcare with oakville's largest incentive cheque for over$920,000 for their initiative on energy efficient systems that put in place that were put inplace in the new oakville trafalgar hospital.

now i'll turn it to my colleague, mike brown. //good evening, mayor burton and town councillors. i want to talk a little bit about some ofthe system operation that is we've got in place. most of you are aware that we do have an industryleading state of the art control room operations underway. as a matter of interest we have ongoing delegations,both provincially, nationally and internationally that come to tour our facility. we strive to continue industry leading inregards to outage management communications

as well as advanced automation to supportthe development in that space. we have a backup control room that's in placeat our glenorchy transformer station up in the north, in case of something happeningat the main station. under innovative partnerships, as a matterof interest, we also service halton hills hydro from our control room operations. it's one of the few in the province that actuallyserves a fellow ldc partners and we look for ways and means to collaborate at that levelwith some of our peers in the industry and in other new developments. moving forward, in regards to tree trimming,as you know we do this annually and we do

it in very tight collaboration with the townof oakville's forestry staff. our 2016 program was completed as planned. as i mentioned, with the strong collaboration,we held an open house at the beginning of 2016 to inform the residents of our plansand we completed it by may. and we had very few challenges en route andthey were handled, in my view, in a very respectful and responsible way. for 2017, we've got a bit of a challengingprogram. we're looking at zone 2. we're looking to advance some of the workinto december instead of january.

again, we are in discussions with town forestrystaff on doing so and we will be conducting an open house to help communicate to the residentswhat our plans are. i want to talk a bit about impacts of climateaction change as it pertains to oakville. one of the key targets of the provincial governmentis electric vehicles. they are targeting 5% of new car sales by2020 to be purely electric vehicle. so that's a pretty significant impact on thei would say the distribution infrastructure and obviously quite positive impact on greenhousegas emissions, etc. currently in oakville we have over 185 electricvehicles registered in the town. and that's as known by the ministry of transportation.

our belief is that there's more, obviously. as a matter of interest, oakville has thehighest density of electric vehicles as a community in canada. it's over 3 per 1,000 residents. so i think that's a point of note. in support of that, we are in the midst andi have mentioned this before at other quarterly updates, we have a smart grid pilot projectin oakville around residentially ev managed charging stations that's underway. and i think we're just around 9 or 10 residentialoperation are up and running.

this is one just to remind the councillorteam here, it's in regards to managing the charge rate through the off peak period whichis a responsible way of ensuring that we meet the customer's obligations but we manage itin a prudent, system friendly way. so we're testing that right now and this pilotis being used as one of the ones to support the ministry's goals. we're also moving forward with two publicev charging stations in respect to the town oakville. there will be one installed here at town hall. and there will be another one on in one ofthe parking lots downtown.

that's the first of a few that we're workingon with town staff. and then we've got continued focus on renewableenergy and we're very proud of that. we have five rooftop solar installations includingon oakville town of oakville assets including this particular facility as well as our headquartersat 861 redwood. safety is our first priority and i'm gladi love to hear the reference to safety in the discussions earlier tonight. i wanted to acknowledge our team. we have gone since june of 2012 at oakvillehydro without a lost time injury on staff. that's 992,000 hours continuously.

i am here to actually verbally report thatwe just exceeded 1 million hours as of last week. so we have now hit a rather dramatic threshold. and that in itself is a testimony to the greatmen and women in our organization who put safety as top priority 24/7. a couple of awards that we actually received. the dave ellis safety award. david ellis, as you may not know, is the sonof rob ellis, a noted oakville resident. david was unfortunately killed in an industryaccident here in oakville and rob has been

absolutely a beacon of safety, focused onyouth safety in the work environment. so for us to be an gnawing are you winnerof that an inaugural winner of that award is we were awarded the 750,000 hours award. in the community i just wanted to highlightthat, in may we under oakville conserves energy fair, we partnered with the town of oakville. we have other events throughout the year,as i have noted here where oakville hydro and its staff look to actively support byits presence and its availability to be in community events. recently the oakville fair at glenashton parklast weekend.

that was an inaugural fair and we enjoyedthe opportunity to be there as such. so that pretty well wraps up our quarterlyreport and i open it up for questions for rob and myself or mary. //mayor burton:thank you, mike. you've got one right over here from councilloradams and then from councillor elgar. and then my goodness, we'll tidy up. //first of all, i'm really glad i asked forthe presentation. i thought it was fascinating. your count of evs in oakville being 185, oneof the first jobs i had when i finished my

degree was to count electric vehicles acrosscanada. that was in the late 90s. and there weren't 185 electric vehicles incanada let alone oakville at the time. that's pretty amazing. i have one question for you.and the first question is: about the led lights, i have had some questions from residents andwe had a discussion at council some time ago not too long ago about the design of the ledlights. first of all there's a flashing red lighton 7 the top of it. there's a difference in the light qualityand colour and the dispersion of the light.

would any of you like to take a stab in explainingto the residents of oakville the elements of the new light standards that are beingused? //well, since they are actually town assets,to my own extent i can maybe comment on some of that, councillor adams. the beacon on the top is actually it's anintermittent light. its intention is to indicate that it's actuallysending. so it's actually when it's flashing on a veryintermittent basis, my understanding is that that's intended to say that it's functioningand operational. when it's not, then it has different lightstatus.

that's as much as i would know on that. in regard to the light intensity line a lotof research was done by town staff in regard to heat rating. and i think that's around a 3,000 rating whichis considered to be nominal lighting for roadway outdoors from a pleasing and visibility pointof view. that's my understanding of that. //and the last thing is to say thank you onbehalf of the northeast oakville fair committee. councillor lishchyna and i and many othersgot to ride in your bucket truck on sunday and it was a lot of fun.

there were lots of i think we had we believethere were about 500 people that came through. which was an astounding number for our firsttime around. thank you very much for at the last momentfor finding a crew, for coming out to do that with the community. it was great. //i know our crew would appreciate that comment. and i know that you probably gave it to themon sunday. but they enjoy events like that. and i have seen some pictures.

so it was great. //thank you very much for that. //you're welcome come. //thank you for the presentation. i do enjoy your presentations when you startmentioning numbers. and i know you're saying 18% of the totalelectricity bill, it's only $28. that's the average for every household. is that when it's calculated? when you come again, would it be possibleto show us the time of day usage on the average?

you know you have the time it would be prettyinteresting to see whether and to show what it was like maybe a years ago or two yearsago, to see how people have shifted to time of day usage. //we could definitely come back with someinformation in that regard. the one thing of note, we peak as a systemand as a community around 5:30, 5:45 in the evening. that's pretty well typical. so it would be yes, we can come back withsome maybe additional information to that extent but that's pretty well our system mary,by all means, go ahead.

//so the three time periods would be on peak,off peak and mid peak. so the averages most residents use is about68% is off peak which is 7 p.m. to 7 a.m. and the other two is the remaining 15% each. so 68% are using their consumption off peakwhich is really good because that's when the prices are the lowest. so that's the average. and i was notices you mentioned you've onlyincreased your rates 1.8%. now, does your rate work on kilowatts? or how does it work?

//our rates are approved by the ontario energyboard so we just increase rates. so they go through a process. and our rates are partially fixed and partiallyvolumetric, which is based on kilowatt hours, the usage part. //how would i explain that to a resident ofoakville? it's part this and part that? //that problem will be resolved because bythe end of next year there will be one fixed rate. //zero usage?

//it's going to move. the whole province will be moving every ldcwill be moving to one fixed rate. //that's interesting. any idea what that one fixed rate will beat this point? //this is just for ours so that it will besimilar to wouldn't be anymore than 30, 301. //in total, what does the average householduse per day? //750 per month. //and 68% is in off peak hours? i appreciate it.

i appreciate the report. //mayor burton:i think we're now to councillorlishchyna. //i also want to echo the sentiments thatcouncillor had put forth. considering it was very last minute that weasked for volunteers, we were so pleased that they came out. that was one of the rides that was lined upall day long. thank you very much for the presentation. you indicated that 6,000 led lights have beeninstalled in the last year. or is it in the last year?

is it in the last quarter? //i think it's in the last do quarters. am i correct? it's been over//what percentage is that of what is still to be installed? //it's between 9,000 and 10,000 totally in. there's 6,000 just over, i think, 9 now lights,if i'm not 9,000 lights, if i'm not mistaken. //are you able to provide any informationabout the savings to the town with respect to that conversion?

//i would suggest yes, i would that wouldbe a really good conversation with the town and we can come back and talk to that oncethe system is up and operational. i think they're going through some testingand calibration and things of that nature. //my last question is the smart grid pilotthat you had mentioned in your report, is that funded by the province? or is that by oakville hydro? because it sounds like the province is lookingto get information out of that. //it's an in kind. //we also are leasing out the ev charge themanage chargers.

so we're working with the technical developmentcompany as well as the back office management company. so since we're leasing it, it's an oakvillehydro asset that we're putting in on a measured pilot basis. so that's our cost in, plus the time and effortto put it up and operational. there is some additional financing on thedevelopment end. i know that the province is providing throughtheir smart grid fund to try to get all the whole process put in place. //mayor burton:i think we're over to councillorgittings now.

//thank you so much. you mentioned adding a charging station indowntown oakville. any idea, at this point when we rebuild downtownhow many we would be adding? because if there was a time to do it costeffectively, if it be one per block or a green corral, what the best practices are. any sense at this point? //we have had ongoing discussions with townstaff on this. the two was kind of to get into the game andlook for those opportunities. i would agree with you, i think there's moreopportunities downtown.

part of it is the parking situation and howdo you actually position an ev charging station to provide the most benefit? usually it's the municipal parking areas whereyou get best access. we have very few i can probably think of twoor three specific sites that would be best in the core. but we'll definitely work to put more. and we have more in plan for considerationright now but the two is just just to get it underway, make sure we've got a good footprintto start and more would be considered for sure.

//all right and further to councillor elgar'squestion, the comment was 68% of the usage by oakvillians is off peak. did i miss it? do we know what that's grown from? can we go back that far to see what differencethe peak strategy has made? i'm suggesting we probably don't have thatfor that meeting. //i'm just curious on whether have we shiftedthe needle finish. //to see whether the time of use has createdan actual move on the needle in regards to usage.

that's something we could bring back. //i echo the ward 6 candidates in terms ofthe bucket lift truck. that's on my bucket list as well. //no pun intended. //mayor burton:councillor knoll. //i'm going to join the chorus and thank youas well for supporting oakville park fall fair with the bucket truck. i didn't get a chance to go on it, becausethe line was so long. i didn't want to stand in front of 8 yearolds.

actually i was afraid. thank you very much for that. i'm a member of the pilot program, just toput that out front and i love it. it's great. the one thing that i noted in my experiencewith that pilot is that houses in particularly in the newer subdivisions aren't necessarilywired to accommodate this new emerging technology. for example, when you were coming to installnot you personally coming to install the charger, i didn't have sufficient amperage in my house,so i had a problem. is this something that is being noted by thefolks that i guess at standards whether i

don't think it's obc but it's probably thewhatever legislation it is that dictates minimum standards for wiring of homes. is that something that's contemplated forfuture legislative or regulatory change to make sure that homes are built with sufficientcapacity to accommodate this technology? //councillor knoll, that's a very astute question. it's exactly what needs to be done. working group at the ministry level with regardsto this with the whole evolution of ev because they really want to get right as they rollit out across the province. one thing for sure, similar to what they havedone in british columbia, specifically in

vancouver, is they have modified the buildingcodes to reflect the fact that all new residential buildings have to be properly wired, properlyserviced to allow evs and that even goes as far as condo units. all new condo units and this is being plannedin ontario as well. in collaboration between the ministry of energyand i forget the the plan is to look for separate infrastructure for condos so that you couldactually provide ev charging and it's not actually part of the common infrastructureso that ev users would be able to be they would be paying through their own cost ofuse type thing. but that is definitely front and centre forthe ministries, to say building code has to

change to make sure that we're not obligatingmajor change outs going forward on new homes. good point. //mayor burton:back to councillor lishchyna. so the earlier discussion by or comment bycouncillor gittings about off peak hours brought something that i recall from, i guess, thenews or the newspapers about the province indicating that people are being too efficientso they're not getting enough revenue from the off peak hours. is there anything that any discussions thatyou have heard of with respect to eliminating the dealt or the change between those thedelta or the change between those hours, the

7 p.m. to 7 a.m. versus daytime in order toincrease the revenue sources from hydro? not that they're not increased (indiscernible). //the government itself doesn't get any revenuefrom the electricity usage. if anything, over time they would increasethe delta between the low rate and the high right now due to the controversy over highelectricity rates the government may not do anything or they'll just keep status quo fora while. and there's actually supposed to be a rateincrease coming out before november 1st and it was supposed to be actually announced today. typically we hear about those because every6 months there's an increase in time of use

rates. we haven't heard. maybe that's not going to happen this timedue to the concern about rising electricity rates but if anything the delta would riseover time to promote more off peak use. //i'll just add one little anecdote if i could,ev charging, the one very clear message that the ministry has, they are looking at freeovernight charging for evs in the province of ontario. that's part of the working group group's mandatecouncillor knoll, i thought you would be thrilled with that that's an area that they're zeroingin on.

they're look to go implement that in the beginningof 2017. they have got a pretty aggressive track planon this one. //can you also comment on the capacity ofthe system if we do get such an increase in ev use? //yes. i can talk to our distribution system. i believe we're in pretty good shape. if you have pockets of electric vehicles ina neighbourhood, if they are all con deaned around condensed around one transformer anda transformer one ev level 2 charger would

be the equivalent of one home charge. so that's adding another home to the serviceload on a transformer. that's the significance of it. if you have two or three, then we could getinto a situation. but our view on this one is we would ratherget out in front of it. that's why the managed charger pilot. we would rather be part of working with thecustomers or residents around ensuring they can meet their needs, at the same time managetheir system. and i think the ministry feels that way aswell.

we won't get everybody there but i believethat we have good monitoring in our system. we will continue to monitor from a load pointof view and we'll be looking for those hot spots as identified. because knowing where those evs in the system,that's the key, to be quite frank. and we gain information from the mto on wherethose locations are and we use that as a basis for understanding the impact in our system. //mayor burton:thank you very much to everyonefrom oakville hydro and the motion to receive now is on the floor from councillor o'meara. thank you for that.

and councillor adams. and the consent items are received and approved. council, i now call your attention to theconfidential consent item. is there a mover and seconder for this item? councillor grant and councillor knoll? council, congratulations. we've just appointed a deputy fire chief. and it can now be revealed that congratulationsare in order to paul boissoneault. and chief i hope he's happy.

council, you already dealt with discussionitem number 3. that brings us to item number 4, the supplementaryreport. the province of ontario coordinated land useplanning review. if you've give your attention to mr. biggar, we'll update us on the matter we referredto this meeting. //your worship, we have dealt with this beforeand we made a few changes. i don't need a presentation unless other membersof council do. but i do have a question of mr. biggar on this.

//mayor burton:councillor, i would like forthe benefit of the public the presentation. would you like to ask your question first? //doesn't matter. we had got presentation. maybe it will//go ahead with the presentation. maybe it will answer my question. that's fine. //mayor burton:he's giving you a chance. // again a couple of weeks from our last meeting.

item 4 on your agenda is a supplementary reportto that first report that we discussed two weeks ago at planning and development councilon october 3rd. just to reorient to this subject, the coordinatedland use planning review has been underway since 2015 looking at four provincial plansincluding the two that apply to oakville, the green belt plan and the growth plan. and we have participated fully in this processas staff and as council and as community. we're approaching the deadline for commentsto the province on the proposed changes to these plans. and that deadline is at the end of this month,october 31st.

again, this is where the pictures dry up inmy presentation. it's pretty text heavy from here on but itwon't take very long to get through. the two plans that do apply to oakville asi mentioned, the growth plan and the green belt plan. we're back here tonight again, when we discussedon october 3rd we reviewed how the vision of the plan has been reinforced through thisplanning framework to curb sprawl, to direct and manage growth. that's been confirmed and refined throughthese proposed changes to the plans. these changes have introduced some new concepts.

we've seen how the upper and single tier responsibilitieshave been enhanced through these proposed changes. some of the changes are subtle yet significant. we went through some of those together. there remains some long standing matters unresolved. and again we have some concerns identifiedaround uncertainty and the proposed implementation measures. so at that meeting on october 3rd, councildeferred the item back for staff to provide additional information.

and that's what this supplemental report isbefore you. we have brought back the original report. we brought that back in the appendix of thereport in its entirety and we have as well as provided this new information. there are essentially four items that we discussedthat council wanted to have more commentary added to the town's submission to the province. and so one of the key ones which links tofunding, which is a major concern about how to fund growth, we wanted to be very clearwith the province that growth must pay for itself and that when we talk about new toolswe want the message to be very clear that

those new tools are not local taxes. we want to see proper funding for growth comingfrom the province. and we also are recommending that as a sustainableapproach, amendments to the development charges act to provide for the full recovery of growthrelated costs would be something that the town of oakville would recommend to the province. second major comment that we had was aroundthe green belt problem. and you may recall this is a made in oakvillegood news story urban river valley designation. we felt that the province needed to understanda little bit more the town of oakville's position around how to implement a systems based approachto protecting natural heritage and that the

provincial policy to do so would be more suitablymet through the designation if it was applied independent of landownership, so that thedesignation would apply equally to public lands and private lands. and so that is our second main point in thesupplementary comments to the province about the urban river valley designation. that should apply to private lands as well. this again is a continuation of our discussionaround the types of decisions that council makes, and related to the implementation ofofficial plan. one of the big components of our officialplan is an urban structure.

and in the report from october 3rd we wererecommending to the province that any private applications to change the fundamentally changeor affect the town's urban structure should not be permitted. and that, further, the town of oakville counciland the town of oakville wanted to recommend that any implementation of an urban structurethrough council decisions would be sheltered from appeal, so that once those decisionswere made, then everyone had to live with those decisions and wouldn't have an appealprocess to try and change council's decision. so that was very important continuation ofthat discussion and that point about protecting the urban structure.

and then finally this is under the subtlebut significant changes category. it's how the responsibility for planning decisionshas been shifting up away from the local municipalities and into the upper and single tier realm. so, the recommendation to the province isthat those changes proposed in the growth plan should not shift responsibility awayfrom lower tiers. and the message that we want to deliver isthat the best opportunity for the implementation of growth and development and the developmentof complete communities is with the local authority. so they cannot be left out or excluded fromthat decision making process.

and so the requirement to undertake localplanning and to reflect important community attributes and neighbourhood qualities mustbe required by the growth plan, not reduced by the growth plan. so those are the four key comments we tookaway from our october 3rd meeting, in quick summary. the recommendation in the report before youis a long one but essentially what we're saying in the first bullet is to receive the firstreport today's supplementary report and the october 3rd appendix, original report. so council we're asking to receive that.

and then we're asking council to endorse thispackage as our submission to the province. then thirdly and that would be to be submittedby the october 31st deadline. and then to circulate this package to allour partners and our colleagues in other agencies. and that's the that concludes my presentation. councillor elgar, did you still have a question? //yes, i do and it's back on number 3, shelteringlocal municipal council decisions. when i look at that reading, restrictionsto be placed on the initiation of private official plan amendments for large scale proposalsoutside of designated urban structure. right now, if you go to the regional officialplan, it's urban area which pretty well oakville

is urban area, the most part. but urban area includes parks, golf courses,all the lands basically in oakville. my concern was that we shouldn't just sayit's outside of the designated green field and boundary area. once council makes a decision on large scaleprojects, they can't be appealed. that was what i meant a week of two ago. but when i read this maybe i'm reading itwrong but i don't see it says that. //the second bullet on the slide is intendedto shelter the council decision around implementing not take the//are we if we're in the urban area on the

regional plan, and we happen to have someprivate open space you could have a parking lot. it doesn't matter. but if it's in this area, does that mean thatwe will have to accept the applications? like, this is a very fundamental importantthing for me anyway. that we're very clear going forward what isintended. //so the suggestion the recommendation inthe first bullet is to say for large scale private applications that are not conformingto the urban structure. not following the urban structure.

those would not be permitted. //i hear you. what does that mean? what is urban structure? for you, urban structure means what? //well, i think//does it mean private open space, specifically? //i think large open space areas, privateopen space included, are part of the //it's urban structure? //i think every element in the town formsa part of the structure.

so we have a structure for managing growthand development. our growth areas are stable, protected residential. the transportation system, all of those addup to form a structure. //but you're only taking out saying they can'tdo it for green field area and built boundary area. what you're really saying is they can't appealin a green belt area or anything outside of the urban area, is what i read this. am i reading it incorrectly? i hope i am.

i'm not sure. i need your help here. mayor, the intent of this recommendation isto ensure that if there's a change to the urban structure so a designated urban structurewithin the plan, that could be a private open space changing to something else. it could be a major retail changing to residential. it it cannot be taken place through a privateamendment. it can only be taken through a municipal comprehensivereview. so an applicant can't come in and apply forsomething.

and if council does not agree with that, theycouldn't appeal it. this is almost the same way in which we approachemployment lands, for example. you can't come in and convert employment lands. you can make an application. if council doesn't agree, you can't appealit to the board. the second recommendation that's there takesit a step further. this is, i think, the suggestion that youhad made at planning ang development council which was that amendments that result fromthat municipal comprehensive review should not be subject to an appeal.

so in essence those two combined things saywhen you're changing your major urban structure, we've done a it's not subject to an ontariomunicipal board press. //why did we say urban structure, bracket,designated green field area and built boundary area? why did we highlight that? only that portion? because knowing how people think they lookfor the particular word and say, well, you didn't say that. like, what you just said, jane, absolutely,that's what i want.

but i'm worried about what we bracket thosewords, because you can see where maybe someone else may take it literally somewhere differentthan where we intend to go. can we add in here, so it's very clear? is it possible, jane? //i could attempt to clarify, through you,mr. chair. i think the first bullet is a little briefas far as providing a full explanation of what's intended with that statement. in the appendix "a" so the original report,i've turned that up now.

and it is page 91 of the agenda. and that section, 2 i can let you go there. it provides a little more explanation. what the current growth plan requires is amunicipal comprehensive review to amend your urban boundary or to so it's to expand thebuilt boundary area or a designated green field area. //okay, kirk, this is exactly it. that's right. and that's not enough.

we have to go further. //so then what this comment is saying is thatthe power or the requirement to do a municipal comprehensive review also needs to be expandedto include changes to the urban structure. and so any private application and flowingfrom there through the explanation. so we feel currently the growth plan doesn'tprotect the local authority's urban structure and we're asking that it be expanded to protectin two ways: one, by requiring an mcr to change an urban structure. and secondly, decisions to implement thatmunicipal comprehensive review to develop the structure would be sheltered from appeal.

//but when i read the quotations everybodyelse reads it that it protects everything but i certainly don't get that feeling wheni read it. i the designated green field area and builtboundary area that's excluded from allowing the developers to say, we're going to buildhouses here. it's in the urban area. //sorry, are you back to the point on theslide? or//back to the point on the slide and in the secondary report also, kirk. number 3 on page 85.

just beef it up a little bit. you know what we want. i just don't think it comes across if we don'task for it if you don't ask, you'll never get. that's my concern. maybe we won't get it//i think we are asking it in two parts of the report. so on page 85 when the third bullet is intendingto do or the third point, point number 3, is to refer back to the original comment onpage 91.

and so that original comment says that changesto the urban structure should only be done through a municipal comprehensive review. as is currently required for these other typesof changes. and so that's what's bracketed. so we're saying that same protection the samerequirement needs to be extended to the urban structure as well as expanding the urban boundary,for example. //that's what you're saying in this? //that's what we say on page 19. the municipality and that private applicationsto change that urban structure should be restricted.

//which would look after dealing with privateopen space. they cannot do that. //or other types of//yes, got it. //so that's what the first point on page 91says. then we discussed that point and you raisedthe idea of sheltering decisions to implement that urban structure. and so once this council makes a decisionaround the urban structure, that's not subject to appeal. //it's done.

//and that's what the bullet 3 on page 85is intending to communicate. so this slide sort of mashes it all up//rolls it together. by itself it doesn't do what i wanted. i thank you for that. //mayor burton:bottom line, we're not submittingthe slide. we're submitting recommendation. //the report has, i think, the right content. //mayor burton:just in case there's somethingnew, let's hold the phone here. the director has come up.

councillor gittings, you can be next. biggar? //sorry, pardon me? i missed the question. //we're waiting to see if you have anythingfresh or if we're going to councillor gittings. //that's all i had to say to councillor elgar'spoint. //mayor burton:i think i'm clear on that. in terms of the first point, improvementsto development charges legislation, i guess this is more of a request for budget shareat the region we know there's a shortfall

of about $10 million a year as a result ofthe changes to the dc act nearly 20 years ago. i think it may be of interest for our residentsand the committee members in terms of what that effect has on the town budget, seeingas we're going through the 2017 process. //mayor burton:i happen to know that number. it's about $7 million a year for us. and of course we pay for our share of theregion's ten. //which is about another 40%. so pretty darn close.

//mayor burton:so you're $11 million a yearthe oakville taxpayer to subsidize developers. //mayor burton:you're welcome. //do we have a report on that? that would be good to have. //mayor burton:we could probably get you one.is councillor elgar moving this? //i will move it to get this rolling. we've got another important one coming upin november on the omb reform too. so it's going to be interesting. //mayor burton:who would like to second it?

council, that brings us to new business. and i'm not aware of any. but i am aware of two requests for reports. councillor adams? //under new business, i have a have quickcongratulatory note to say to the organizers of the northeast oakville fair that we heldon sunday i mentioned it earlier but i wanted to formally congratulate the committee thatput it all together including councillor lishchyna and myself, and there are two residents inparticular, maureen taylor and rashad nazir who were instrumental in making it makingit come together.

and i wanted to thank our staff who helpedout providing guidance, putting tables together, getting a fire truck out, getting the oakvillehydro truck out. there were a whole bunch of bits and piecesthat came together and it was a whole group of people that were involved in making theirlittle bits happen. so i just wanted to thank our staff for thehelp that they provided as well. we had something like 500 people out there. we were crossing our fingers for the weatherand the weather really held out for us. so it was a really nice day. //mayor burton:i take it you're a believerin community fairs now?

//it was a lot of fun. //mayor burton:council, if there's no otherit's moved by councillor lishchyna, seconded by councillor knoll that staff report backon the new fees and permits schedule with respect to union gas being required to applyfor permits for maintenance work. any discussion? approved. moved by councillor o'meara, seconded by councillorlishchyna that staff report back to council on licencing for airbnb in oakville. council, it's now time to deal with the considerationof reading of the by laws.

is there a mover and seconder for the by laws? councillor knoll. councillor gittings. opposed, if any. the by laws are carried. that concludes our agenda. thank you very much for your time and attention. it's been great working with you.and we're adjourned.

Location:

Share :

You may like these posts :

• 
  McLaren P1 20142015 Review 2017 Autocar
• 
  2016 McLaren 570S Dissected – Feature – Car and Driver
• 
  The McLaren 720S is a real threat to Ferrari Business
• 
  NEW McLAREN 675LT Spyder LHD Exesport
• 
  Image Gallery 2017 Mclaren P1
• 
  2015 McLaren P1 GTR Limited Edition 3 Wallpaper HD Car
• 
  McLaren 675 LT: full spec and details of new Longtail by
• 
  McLaren 570S Rendered in Spider Guise GTspirit