Additions 2010/06/28ADDITIONS TO COUNCIL, MONDAY, JUNE 28, 2010
COMMUNITY SERVICES
1. F- 2010 -43 - Water Sustainability Plan Report
a) Copy of Water Long -Range Financial Plan report
COUNCIL
1. PD- 2010 -40 - Official Plan Amendment to Incorporate New and Updated
Environmental Policies, City of Niagara Falls, AM- 2005 -24
a) Correspondence from Beatrice Phelan
COUNCIL INFORMATION
1. Information regarding the Inter - Municipal Transit Proposal.
a m# LO LO & w =__ «/ 2 CO 4 2
5 m & .§
§ \ / \ CC
.
as w I
\ 0 o \ E
CZ
L (V \ 0
I ii 5
c i o ¢
ci /
�� f \ ƒ
¥ a o = a
\ / \ \
_ /
b
Qs
Q.
o
0
Ca
inZ
CD 2
oc�
0
J
CD
RI
0
G
N o cd Cr,
' N \ N N N O 9 0 i N
O N G d O O -0 �` N a) S N
.0 E t6 .0 7 ° G o s R ''
.' G
3 N N w G N ✓ 0- IS 7 G O id ca G 'c6
N N N c O G G 0 --- o- O
✓ N N N - cd O O U N 6 !� v c6
E N 3 O N CDs N i6 . 9
s a) 9- - s 9 . -d
O Y 9 0 N t6 p� G O N ✓ 9 • U 9 �
o O ( 1) o 3 o --- o ° • P
67 ?7 70 - N S O T U e RS
-9 cl (r) U G U N O c6 w' 91 U
N O N 6 ✓ G O % v O ib ▪ O � G O S
� ¢ V N G U O O 07 O
7 0 O ;d G D E G o cb —, O S U O-
0. 9 N c e 9 O 6 c. to � N 3 o
✓-0 0 ' 4--- ' N G % c4 U Z r cs � N (P-- c6
U ' U a c. a) i c d
U
O Q -0 ¢ Y •
4
O O- 4 6 -6- L 0 1
O
N ''U Y • 6 0-
cc 0 7 s
O 'O c.
Y ✓-
0 q) •
•
•
„„ N
N c ▪ N
6
a) N 'a -0 0' 3
0 N N 5
O
' •'0 V
CP O c6
6 G t) —6 c6 . ' i
N �G c N
i� Z 3 N c . G47
G " G 0)
e s N Q c a d 0
O G cd c6
• Y
_ 6 0 - ?
C7
i O G�
N '" ca O Y . Nd
CD - c
0 G 6 N
o
C1- ' N
_ • N s
G O v N E S
O rn G N 'O O
N N
6 la
U 'O G O) T
\ v O G 6
a c s • N O N
e 6 0 .S G
- 0 . 0)
Y v
s s r
•
t6 O
0
(1)
•
G O O c
G — O ✓ rj -0
C3 �6 ' v O) •' O O
• O G N O y c6
"r N U t) 0)
7 N 3 0 c 6 c6 U O
cV 6 O N c6
N � O "O 6 c RS N O o) U
N d U tiv U G O 3 N O � Q cy, y N ✓
s. cd G '✓ i % O — r .� (v
Y
)
O -1 U �G 7 ``c 4 t V G 65 cd -' CU c6
O Q �6 ;-"In 'O 1d G 9. 0) 3 N N
6 N G � .- N % 'i.) -,
0 g. 0 S G y d i U U 4 cU6 06 9
01 O . V cb N R5 @ v 'r O C G O
y> •Q 3 U c6 G
0 G ------ c6 O
G N 67 O ( .5 ° U- O9 (i6
O c6 --Cr' c6 0 N Q Q
c6 N 4) G N c6 N 43 .0 01
c4 c6
S. r O
° `c6 4 cd O G G C5 p
•
- O N r O O U 6 ' c6
t }7 .0 O G
0- c la
U N ."..-• .r N c6
(4 ✓ 'c6 N O
G ✓ O- G .-. O ¢ . N U
ttS N U) G U
o
O N O 6 Q om ) O
c6 9
0 0 O N
AS O O
.0-
.
N
O 3 N v cts
G -) p O O�
N -
o t1- G
0 O 0 U
0 0 r
0 Q
r t)
E N N
N CSC O
O ✓ p U Q)
c6 U
°' sib- O N
O RS
r
y c6 % "�
N ✓ U c6 N ..-,'
y •3 2. G 5.
N c ..G N G c . N - Q N
O N '0 S 7 6
N U
0 0 v y O N
Q- ' r G y ^O
N O p
0.
/ .o \ \ > as - 0
§ t / e ° 0 2
2 a E 0 / 2 a
/ 6 \ E _
n c _ E (C.,3 / -
§ § j
K f § G % ° .z o 0
TCS j . 0
§ §
2 � /
0 o% o / o 5
2 n\\ \ c m = 2 as c §
> 3 ° % .E E k CD
° Cr) \ \ / E ( : a \
§ u > _
C15 E 00 0 f - .
/ 0. c m/� § E CL
4
2 k 3 \ / c
2 n & § o
as $ c R \ = / 0
c * 2 .o 2 ®
,- ) 0 a.
/ f 2 13
f m o
o O 0 ° c
a m n 2 a o a 2
2 % c 0 2
i ) 2
o § c cz ƒ \
c Q
c 2 2 v
. 2 -o ' e
c
\ c § -z
2
@ . 2 : o E '-
I 0. c 2 o m
a \ •
0_ •_
q 0 \ 3 /
• c 2
/ 2 0 ° c
j 0
- 0
§ Q_ u) CS)
\
- - G
/ a L) > o
in 5 / o c t
° 3 ® ® O a
£ n / '•
O 7 ° ® d
2 2
7 >, - a. - 0
. 'E 7 2 ¢ / / £
§ 5 c § - a §
f / / > n =
w 3 @ / ƒ •
•
0 0
v =
c w
- % =
o
0
_ D
= '
c E
0
» 2
CL
= m
U) \
n >
7 = =
. /.
/ > e
1 o
% m
Cri as
r ui
2 f k
o c
k 0
a § cti
Ti .g c »
k n E
'> 2 c 0
2 -o c /
a.
= k
m 0
u 0 c §
E ■ •- 0_
E \ 0 •
2 o b
% ¥ > 2
y 9 ° 9
.- q _
c # § >
66 /2
>, 0 f m 0
. 5 2 O 2 _c
o 0 % $ E \ 0
E . \ f ./ o
as o w ± 2 c
G R \
§ o k o . E
E ' o :e § o t >,
as o
CL a) � a 00 0 as
/ a ° _ c as
E
% / 8 E £ a_ as
\ 2 0 7 % f /
E c m E
[ o / _ ' 6 \ e
k u) 6 k § \
O o § o E n
c as §
§m• 2 c B
§ 0 \ o c \ c
_ > $ m ƒ as as « - 2 3% 0 2 0 < 2 as
d c U/ 4t/ 2\
@« m a.) 17, a G n ■ E
\ / _
k / /
/ 0 = 0 Fs 2
f\ 0 U o 2 //
2 ^ 0 \ 0 ° o
e 2 0 2 0@
0 2 = a
_ $ _ Ti)
o o 5: /
o £ —
C E E ƒ
o } \ ƒ \ / / f 5 «
@ 2 % c \ £ §
a( \ m @ 2 E m@
y e % 2 E c >>
\ & 0 2 / ± 2 0
.
as 2 o c k // f
c
co
as
> . w . - 7 ; 5 1 . 5 -5 ' 0
E
2
2
0
-- as k
• 2 \ • \ C \ cn
E . ? / 0 \ f k ° / ƒ
§ = o \ • \ / / ) ƒ & —
® 7 0 x± x o I w E 0
0 3 0 2 a ± L y < 5 3 2 F o
/ c 2
c w F .g • • •
$
1
/ 0
3
0
>, /
0 u)
t =
\ E
0 ±
k 0
> . o
0
"5 /
3 m
2 _c c
0 .§ $
-o @ ? §
0 \ =
= .- 0 /
\ k k
° 2 ° /
i 0 i o
CC
E
03
cc
—J
ctj
0
c
as
L1
as
(i)
( s I 2
D
E
as
a)
a)
_o
(1)
CZ
_C
0
0)
z
0
a)
'Ey")
rt.s.
"V)
- 0
0
0_
E
- o
E
- o
a)
- o
0_
_c)
- o
_c
- o
as
a)
E
- o
>,
cri
a)
E
2
To
E . _
a)
cs)
_c
- o
as
_o
- 6
.6 _2
0
as
_o
0)
. _
0
0
as
(I)
a)
0)
as
P_
"S'
(i)
CD
co
as
cs)
. 5
0
0
(,)
- c)
I)
• —
_c
c
o
•c)
0_
. _
a)
0
o o
x 0
0)
0 0
0)
a)
To
as
0)
•
_o
as
as
.. c15
E
0
a)
0
- 0
_c
- o
as
""
0
_c
0
2
0_
0
- o
(i)
- ED
a)
D
as
0
0
as
_c
E
0
Cr
- 0
as
0
a)
c
. c
_0
_C
0
0
- 0
CD
(15
0_
a)
_o
0
. _
cs
as
ci)
as
0..
as
L
CD
c
_c
0
73
0
1
_c
CD
0)
TY)
f
a>
cts
(13
a)
a)
_c
_c
a)
_c
(i)
a)
as
_c
a)
a)
0
,4=
a)
0
7:3
0
(r)
CL
U_
§
2 0
C _ >,
%
§ .0
0 cn
o o
} 6
z 0
;4= % 6
0)
> ca
%\-
. _ 5
. o
0)
= E o
CL f
./ > 0
/ -o %
o
o 2 %
\
CZ _0Ta '6
¢ 2 )
0 o
o
E 0
o aS k /
E m £ L
.
E) 2 2 _1
o / -C
—
cli \ / /
2 § 0 0)
@ . \ 2
._ 2 2
c o / k
° ƒ < . E
c 0 O 0
o § >
aS
2 0 \ >,
��
- o -o Q
o_ / \ o
o m @
> ] n
a) g m u)
Ti f .\
ƒ � /E
g =
CC
o } \
/ o .E _c
f
C
C
(a )
(/) a )
>
• U
c a
O >
TO
Fa
U c
Y O
Q)
as
.c
a)
O
O) O
• (1)
5 a)
o
O c
t
• o_
L
o
>,
• • •
0
N
N
U
a)
-0
cc
:
(a
c
a)
a)
0
c
O
as
N
(0
N
(0
a)
(a
O
c
U
a)
0
c0
a)
>
O
.
- o
- o
c
O
a)
O'
i)
c
a)
a)
a)
O)
0
- o
c
a)
0)
a)
L
- o
c
O
a)
N
as
0
a)
c
c
LL
m
N
a)
cc
- o
(d
U
a)
N
N
0
cc
To
0_
(0
U
a)
Q)
N
a)
N
(0
0
U
c
O
.
c
N
O
a)
1-
y
CC
O
Q
•
N
a)
as
O)
O
a)
0
O
O
U
c
as
Q
a)
L
vi
0
U
as
m
as
as
a)
(d
a)
a)
N
X
a)
c
a)
4)
O
N
a)
a)
U
N
Q
CZ
U
- o
a)
- o
c
O
N
as
0)
c
U
(0
c
O
a)
U
O
N
(0
E
a
0)
a)
.
E
a)
as
N
(0
O)
O
Q
c0
"O
V
•
>
O
U
4)
N
O
U
0)
U)
c
O
a)
- o
O
a)
Q
'U
c
O
E
U
0)
.
0
i)
N-
ap
C)
LO
•
c
a)
a)
o
U
(0
L
O
O
O
O_
a)
O7
c
U
m
c
a)
a)
0
U
c0
c
O
U
O
Q
a)
(d
- o o _c
a
c O
O N a s
Y c O
c
c a) o
U > U
D N L
Q) c
(0 N c -o
as c
(1) c0 as
a) >, c
U U (71 as N C Q
U c (s
• U Q v i
0 • Tts O U 0
c =
o c (n Y a.
• (o Y
• o O c O a)
as c
(s • N c c 2
N N O - (s
a' cu L
as 2 a) " c (�
a) U
a) ` _ cn
0) c _
a)
• • CC c o
L
H
c
. ET)
as
N
U
c
c
0
0
U
c
O
0
a)
a)
L
O
O
N
a)
U
U
a)
O
>,
:
E
Q
- o
a)
O
0)
CL
0
O
c
O
Q
c
0)
c
O
U
a)
O
a)
N
U
a)
(0
a)
L
(0
0)
0
0
vi
C
a)
.5
0
O_
c0
U
a)
c
(a
C
0
(d
0
ti
0
N
(0
U
co
E E F
Q 0
§ / %
2 2
k k k
g
o 2
2 w as
§ 2) /
_o as @
ƒ .2 Q
E
§ k
t R
\ §
2
c ƒ / cc
2 E
C ¥
§ -e 3
3 ¢
Z /
m m c 2
rl >
0 E c . 0
O. > C.) \
o
0 Z > -0
m
G 3
/ ƒ ¢
o_ co
k '
\ Q
c 0 2
\ \ \ / \
\ 0 \ 0 \
0
0
\
\
(
•
g g
«
'ƒ
2 \
- m E
n � @
m $ 2
Q
_c
m [
/ \ q
? ƒ/
75
o \
E
as .\
2 -
2 /
'5 o
o_
o
$
0
0
CD
\ / ƒ
c = Q
F. 2 @ @
§ 2
o c % - o
c •� k ) §
- = a 0) §
o @ § \
E .g a
0 E o
as o ' 0
c E o --
§ j k 5
2 / as
/ 0 \ o o \
c .§ 0 g
-o > c / f .
< 2 R R
m > o =
0 3 v �
2 ƒ 0 0
m - / ƒ / /
5 >,fI- f\
@ m
c . c k m
B o c u_
m
0 E \ \ 0 co
o u
c o 0
ctl % ° c
o o Z @ cn
k p 0 2
2 m
c c \ / .§
, o - 73 0 -�
- c m -6 /
@ £ o_ » ' s b
7 . 2 § .� 0 2
2 2 2 w 2 -0
° E L c R m 2
\ y > % \ 0 =
\ - o E 0 ƒ 3
E / ) o CC
2 as
o c as c a E
@ a Tzs
5 / / 0
R 0 < \
\ \ _ @
« a
$ / 0 §
§ ƒ k � §
\ Is)
C CD
as - E up . as
2 - / m 2
k = 0 > -C a \ ' $
d \ S
/ ". Q < \
a _c 2 ui §
\ 0 0
cn
\ k 2 c
e
-o 0 c m
o @ ® '
> o 5,
as
o 2 CC
•c § 0 a
O
- o
as
cts
O
U
O_
E
Q)
L
as
O
E
O
O
U
O
0
E1
i
O)
as
L
- o
Q)
(LS
E
O7
a)
Q)
Q)
>
Q)
N
a)
cc
Zr)
rts
a)
L
O
O
C
Tics
U
7
C —
C V)
(ts O
crs
Q)
O • 'er
C N
g
O O
t Q)
• >
• O
Q E
0
0
o o
o u
o _
o o
o &
N
fA
E ± *
E co � /
° 2
2 2_ o
3 %
CO 'a
� -
- \
E § E
. •— e
I S 3 .\
� /
2
5 1)
> o 2
_ \a/
) 0c •
o 0 7
CD LL) a) \
/ )
0
q
0
q
0
04
0
04
\
0
\
k
cc
N i / CO.
co 0 /
w■ CO
G a■ 2
x
k k /
/ /
m 69
\ CO / co
F \ C
0) 0
e a m
0 k co
� $
— * (
2
\ C 5 / ) / 2 0_ 0 2 ° c
..... n @ 0 u E > w
_ ® g » 2
0 ) c . -o k
L. / 0 es-
%
0 2 c
cm es)
c
2 2§ @ m m g
2 7 \ 2
c o $
\ f 2k . a_ = f o
a. § m 0 2 7 £
= a e 0 2 E m o
E 4z as / e ° ° ' /
_
2 ° as \ 0_ / /
6 ƒ k / » \
0 @
c 2 0 \ / 0 \
f a ) ) $ 9 2 = =
0 m 2 @ @ 7
] 2 § / 12 ) 2
\ § % j e / / 2 0 §
v @ ° . ._ 0 0 / \ E / = E 0 § k %
• \ c c & 3 iii > k § = -C °
_ m
\ 2 c $ E § > .- ) / 2 § e
O 2 0— @£O a . 0 OF
4 d d 9
cfi
/ C § 0
m m g 2 = )
O S .)
C ® o \ ........ / \
2 — ) ® \ 0
Di � e 0 _
ƒ .- n o \ g
0. R j .\ 7 k 2 N
as
2 t c o n
k ' 2 ƒ § E %
\ / \ o 3 0 ® §
2 2 0 § e - U -o .0 .$ .0 ƒ
E m 2
0
o / CO . 2 \ N / a) % ƒ
/ •2 -\� 0 E 2 2 5
-§ m o o= 0 2 ¥_ $
co 2 & 2 / 5 2 2 b -c§ 2
_ o ° 0 c $ S C - 2 2 $ 2 2 V)
_c k § 0 �_ o\ a 2 S
%/ k 2 2 c \ o c k
± c 6 \§ m a a k $% \§
. % § ƒ 2 o ® ® E ° « to ^
o f a\ A f k � � 7 $ ƒ
\ ± \ § ƒ / § \ 0
a 2= k 2 c= 3 n 0 2 2 •E w 0 w .g
CL @ w c 4.0 d 0 d k 4 _6 d
2 O £ -=
% 2 2 a
2
ƒ 2 &
f
Q1
0
L.n 0 CO O LO N N CO LO CO O O N
' N CO f� co 10 O O O LO T
✓ N r CO O M O OO N CO 'ch O
O N 00 Ln c6 In Ln M co O N L()
I� CO a r cr � 'Cl- O r LO T-
- r r N N
O O O O CO CO CO LO N CO CO 00 CO
O CO CO CO CO Ln CO N CO M LO LO
CO O CO V N O N. N O N LO CO O
Ln d' O N O CO O 11) O 00 co - Ln
co O O co co N O r CO LO CO
N r CO_ O 'Cr_ O •cr V L.
r CO
N N . r
64 64 64 63 64 64 64 CO 64 64 64 64 64
N. CO O N O LO 10 O O CO CO
LO CO 0O CO r O Ln r O CO 0
CO d' f� O CO CO N N. CO CO CO
N O N M M O Ln 00 N N- O c\1
co 00 r I- co 00 co r Cp r N LO M
0 r O CO 00
O O .- r
N N r
Ea 6/3 Ef3 Ef3 H> 64 Ef3 CO CO Cf3 CO Ef3 Ef3
r CO CO L() 0 V LO O LO LO O N
0) O 00 00 N co M Ln co O co -
M CO N O d CO N N LO CO 'C CO
O CO O In 00 M Ln (O N- N. O f'-
• N- N V Q) N O CO r r CO
CO , - LO CO CO V' CT O
O O r O
N N r
Ef3 CO Ef3 H3 Ef3 ER E13 CO Ef3 K-3 CO CO CO
c0 V N a' LO N �t O CO O In
✓ N N. N LO CO CO +- N N. O
• 00 CO M CO CO CO O N C7) O
Ln M 00 O t 00 V CO r: O
N N- O N CO O r O CO r 0 d
CO r o N CO N d' CO V f�
O O r C()
N r .-
H3 CO Ef3 CO CO CO Efl E4 CO Ef3 CO (13 CO
CO I� r CO CO CO 0 0 N 0 r
LO N (01010(00)100100'
(00(0 CID O N N N CO LO N CO Lo
Ln O Ln O r d• Ln N co n O O
I� N v:t O CO LO O 00 CO r O r
r CO O CO N- •• CO co
O O r Ili
E4 Ef3 Ef3 H3 CO CO Ef3 Ef• Ef3 CO CO Ef3 CO
N
0
C
>
0)
• cc
a) y
C 0
> C
cc
CD O
cc 2
N
0)
y
C
a)
0
X
w
0)
C
0)
Q
0
0
1-
64
CO
O
LO
O
Ef3
CO 64 Ef3
I-- an co
N 0) CO
O Lt) 0
LO O Ln
✓ co r-
CO N
r r-
Ef3 Ef3 Ef3
CD
y
CD
Q
X
W
C rn
O
0)
Vz
cn
V L N <
U
o
0 0 Q
Efl
CD
cu
CD
CC
cri
RI
Li
au
E
cu
00
A TT e /ON;
A LEX HEJ?LoUCreH
I oteie e6.
ehAtIA • .T4Nc /, 2 ° /0
Dk►2 �CT(2 OF
FALLS 0NT ARID
i LAtslNiN G Deve LvPrncA/t" N ►,gC,A�PA
1 D o NoT AGgEC w) 77-1E 19"rei"
MY LANp ANb 7-,S WHaLE Al App /N�
PRo cE SS
IN 1-NC Ci7y IN DfFIC //•}L PIANAme-ND/hFNT
q M aoo ql - o.2- — c 'Ty or NiM -ARA FALLS .
S hceye.
fEA.R,CE PNELAN
N I A G A R/4 FALLS;
N. 8,
\A) IS Yu 13 N6 \ b O 7 H5 - A ,p 6 ec'1''1 0)4 D-r
— "ri4 f (o p os b f M N b 1`4 1 \17L
RECEIVED
JUN 2 4 2010
PLANNING
& CFVELOPMENT
Ken Todd - Inter - municipal Transit
From: Ken Todd
To: Council Members; Ted Salci
Subject: Inter - municipal Transit
CC: Dave Stuart; Karl Dren; Todd Harrison
Good morning everyone:
Page 1 of 1
I wanted to update Council on the recent events regarding inter - municipal transit. You will recall that on May
12, 2010 I sent an email updating Council on the progress that was being made with respect to Inter - municipal
Transit. This was as a result of Regional Councillor Debbie Zimmerman's appearance before Council on February
22nd to discuss this matter. Council recommended that staff continue to participate in the process.
At a Regional CAD's meeting held on Feb. 26 this issue was discussed and it was agreed that the 3 large
municipalities with transit service would meet to discuss the issue of a Triangle (tri -City) proposal. This involved
Niagara Falls, St. Catharines, and Welland. As part of this process Fort Erie and Port Colborne and were also
consulted.
As a result a proposal was developed by the 5 municipalities that would see a triangular service put in place for
a 2 -3 year trial period that would build upon the service that the 3 transit services already provide. The
incremental costs of providing this extra service would be provided by the Region by way of a grant with no
additional cost to the local municipalities. At the conclusion of the trial period an assessment of the
ridership /revenue /cost ratios etc. would be made.
The CAD's and Transit Managers believe this is a cautious way to gage the need for the system prior to
establishing a full blown Regional transit system. The proposal was submitted to the Region and it was
suggested that if the Region wanted to explore this proposal further, the staffs of the 5 municipalities would be
happy to meet further with the Region and its consultants.
At the Regional Committee of the Whole meeting held on Wednesday, June 23, Regional Council approved
proceeding with Proposal #1 from the document submitted by the local municipalities which will link the
downtown cores of the three municipalities (Niagara Falls, St. Catharines, Welland) and link 3 other
municipalities (Fort Erie, Port Colborne, Thorold) by way of a feeder service.
The proposal calls for the Region to contribute $3.7 million towards the purchase of 8 new buses, which will be
owned by the municipalities (Niagara Falls will get 3). Also, the Region will provide operating funds to the
project , in the neighbourhood of $1.9 million per year. The trial will run for 2 -3 years, at which time a full
review will be undertaken as to the success of the program. An advisory committee comprised of staff from the
3 transit properties will oversee the trial and report periodically to Regional Council . There will be no direct
costs to the local municipalities. The current Brock and Niagara College service will remain and continue to be
funded through those institutions.
Staff will continue to meet with the Region to develop the operational details and once this has been finalized
staff will present a formal report to Council. This should be expected in August /September. It is anticipated that
service could be up and running by September 2011 due to the fact that it takes about one year to order and
receive the buses necessary to run the service.
If you have any question please give me a call or email me Ken
about:blank 25/06/2010
Printed with FinePrint - purchase at www.fineprint.com
Niagara Region
REPORT TO: Chair and Members of the Committee of the Whole Council
SUBJECT: inter - Municipal Transit Proposal
RECOMMENDATIONS)
That this Committee recommends to Regional Council:
FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS
1
PWA 60 -2010
June 23, 2010
1. That the local transit operators be advised that it is the Region's intent to include
a net allocation of $1.35 million in the proposed 2011 Operating Budget, in order
to provide them with a grant to carry out a pilot project to improve inter - municipal
transit in Niagara, in accordance with their Proposal #1.
2. That the Region agrees to transfer up to $3.7 million from capital funding, as part
of the grant, contingent upon the Commissioner of Public Works' approval of
satisfactory arrangements with the local transit providers, consistent with the
service and operating levels proposed in this report.
3. That staff be authorized to continue discussions with the three local transit
providers in order to finalize the operational details for introducing improved inter -
municipal transit, in accordance with their Proposal #1, commencing in the third
quarter of 2011.
If the recommendations in this report are approved, the amount of $3.7 million would have
to be identified for transfer as a one -time grant to the local transit providers. The approved
2010 Capital Budget included an allocation of $3.1 million for the purchase of inter -
municipal transit buses. If the recommendations in this report are approved, staff will
prepare a further report which initiates this project and recommends the source of funding.
It will take approximately a year for the buses to be delivered; therefore, provisions would
have to be made in the 2011 Operating Budget to fund the ongoing operational costs. If
the buses are ordered in August 2010, service should be able to commence by Labour
Day, 2011. The transit operators estimate these annual costs to be $2.7 million gross and
approximately $1.9 million net for the first full year of operation. Therefore, for 2011, a
budget of approximately half that amount (or $1.35 million) should be set aside. In PWA
46 -2010, it was suggested that these operating costs could be funded from the
Contingency Reserve. This proposed funding would also be transferred to the local transit
operators as a grant to cover annual operating expenses.
If the proposed three -year pilot project is to continue, provisions would also have to be
made in the 2012 and 2013 Operating Budgets to fund the annual operating losses.
BACKGROUND
PWA 60 -2010
June 23, 2010
On May 12, 2010, a special meeting of Committee of the Whole was held to consider the
issue of Inter- Municipal Transit and the Phase 2 Work Plan, prepared by ENTRA
Consultants. Committee heard delegations from a number of members of the public
regarding this issue and also received a detailed presentation from Dennis Fletcher of
ENTRA (Genivar) regarding the Phase 2 Work plan Report.
Committee also considered a staff report, PWA 46 -2010, entitled "Authority to Implement
Inter - Municipal Transit — Phase 2 Work Plan Report and Recommendations ". In this
report, staff made a number of recommendations to implement the work plan contained in
the Phase 2 Report.
One of the items of correspondence received at this meeting was an e -mail from Ken
Todd, CAO, City of Niagara Falls (C7499 - see Appendix 1), respecting an Inter- Municipal
Transit Proposal from the municipalities of Fort Erie, Port Colborne, St. Catharines,
Welland and Niagara Falls. It was explained by CAO Mike Trojan that, since this proposal
was received only hours before the meeting, there was insufficient time for staff to
adequately review the proposal.
Therefore, Committee of the Whole voted to defer consideration of PWA 46 -2010 until
staff had sufficient time to review and consider the Inter - Municipal Transit Proposal
submitted on behalf of the five local municipalities.
REPORT
The Inter - Municipal Transit Proposal received from the local municipalities is, in fact, two
proposals which provide options for the Region to consider regarding three -year pilot
projects to improve inter- municipal transit service in Niagara. It is stated in both proposals
that the viability of the pilot projects is based on the capital and operating costs being
assumed by the Region.
2
Proposal # 1
PWA 60 -2010
June 23, 2010
Proposal #1 would provide hourly service, Monday to Saturday, between the downtown
terminals of the three existing transit providers and improved service for the existing
connections from Fort Erie to Niagara Falls and Port Colborne to Welland. It is proposed
that this service would operate independently of the existing buses which connect Brock
University and the two Niagara College campuses. This proposal is similar to the
recommended short -term system recommended by ENTRA in the Phase 2 Work Plan, but
does not provide quite as high a level of service. The service plan schematic for this
proposal is attached as Appendix 2.
The transit operators are recommending that this service would require the purchase of
eight accessible buses, which would provide for two spare units. This would require an
initial capital expenditure of approximately $3.7 million.
The operating loss for the first year of this service is estimated at $1.9 million, based on
expenses of $2.7 million and revenue through the fare box of $0.8 million.
Proposal # 2
This proposal would increase the frequency of service on some of the existing inter -
municipal routes (connecting Niagara Falls and Welland to the Brock Hub) and improve
service for the existing connections from Fort Erie to Niagara Falls and Port Colborne to
Welland.
This pilot project would require the addition of three new buses, at an estimated capital
cost of $1.4 million.
The estimated annual operating expense for the first year of this service enhancement is
$0.92 million. The annual operating revenue is estimated at $0.32 million assuming full
revenue recovery from students. This results in an annual operating Toss of approximately
$0.61 million.
Staff feel that this proposal only addresses the request by the students for enhanced
service to the campuses and does little to improve connections to the downtown business
areas for employment, business and shopping trips. It also fails to provide improved
connectivity to other transit services such as GO bus (or future GO rail).
Therefore, staff prefer Proposal # 1 as we feel it better addresses needs, as identified in
the ENTRA report. Following discussion with CAOs from the municipalities submitting this
proposal and their transit operators, we are confident that the proposal can be refined to
meet our needs for a pilot project to improve inter - municipal transit in Niagara.
3
Staff have reviewed Proposal #1 and offer the following comments:
Advantages to Funding Inter- Municipal Transit Proposal #1
PWA 60 -2010
June 23, 2010
Staff has considered Proposal 1 and identified a number of service improvements in this
pilot project which warrant Council's considerations, Proposal #1 would:
• Provide a much improved level of service for transit connections between the
major downtown urban centres.
• Avoid the need for the Region to seek Triple Majority approval to be in the
conventional transit business.
• Take advantage of the existing resources and expertise of the three existing
transit operators.
• Allow the Region to evaluate the potential and need for improved inter - municipal
service without making a major commitment or significant investment in
infrastructure or resources.
• Potentially provide better connectivity to local transit service, GO bus and other
inter - regional services.
• Have no negative impact on the existing service between Brock University and
the Niagara College campuses, which is being paid for by the students.
(However, it also does not address the service improvements that the students
have requested).
• Provide a good first step towards achieving Council's visions for public transit in
Niagara.
Disadvantages to Funding Inter - Municipal Transit Proposal #1
Despite the numerous advantages to moving forward with this proposal, there are some
concerns that staff feel need to be identified for Committee's consideration:
• Proposal #1, as presented, is not quite as good as the triangle level of service
recommended in the Phase 2 Report. However, staff feels that we can work with
the transit providers to address any issues of this nature by agreeing to minor
adjustments in the proposal. In fact, the proposal did state that additional late
evening trips may be required to Niagara Falls during the summer.
4
PWA 60 -2010
June 23, 2010
• The financial outcome of this proposal is that the service would be funded
proportionally on the basis of assessment by all twelve local municipalities. In
the ENTRA Phase 2 Report, they recommend that the municipalities receiving
direct benefit from inter - municipal transit pay a greater share of the operating
costs than those municipalities receiving only indirect benefit from the service.
Council's Transit Vision does provide that the cost for providing inter - municipal
transit be distributed in a "fair and equitable manner ".
• The proposal does not provide for the introduction of other additional services
recommended in the Inter - Municipal Transit Work Plan Phase 2 Report (other
Second -Tier Feeder Services and Rural Demand Response Service).
Recent Discussions with Proponent CAOs and Transit Managers:
On Monday, June 21, 2010, Regional staff met with the Transit Managers and CAOs from
the municipalities who are making this proposal. There was general agreement on the
way forward if Regional Council adopts the Proposal #1 recommendations in this report.
The following elements were agreed, in principle, to be included in the Inter- municipal
Transit pilot project and will:
• Require a further refinement in Proposal #1 submitted to finalize operational
issues and levels of service.
• Provide regular information updates to the Region on a semi - annual basis in the
first year of capital acquisition, and on a quarterly annual basis thereafter, on the
performance of the transit pilot project, including revenue /cost ratios, ridership
statistics, and other relevant operational and service metrics to determine the
value of the transit pilot.
• Provide adequate annual funding from the Region to cover the operating deficit,
or provide a return of unused grant funds to the Region if the ridership revenues
exceed the operational expense requirements.
5
SUMMARY
Council is basically left with two choices if it still wishes to proceed with improvements to
inter - municipal transit service over the next few years. Council could:
1. Approve the staff recommendations contained in PWA 46 -2010, which direct
staff to attempt to obtain Triple Majority Approval and then implement the
recommendations contained in the Phase 2 Work Plan Report, or
2. Approve the recommendations contained in this report (PWA 60- 2010), which
would initiate implementation of Proposal 1 of the submission on a pilot basis,
which would be funded by an annual grant provided by the Region.
In the event that the staff report (PWA 46 -2010) and a Triple Majority are not approved,
Council may wish to consider Proposal #1, as submitted by the municipal partners. There
still remains the concern that, if inter - municipal transit is funded by an annual grant, then it
is not "fair and equitable" to those municipalities receiving only the indirect benefits from
the service.
Staff have evaluated the two options and suggest a preference for Proposal #1 to improve
Niagara's inter - municipal transit services, commencing in the third quarter of 2011. In the
interim, staff will continue to work with the transit providers to finalize the operational
details associated with Proposal #1.
Submitted by: Approved by:
Mike Trojan
Commissioner of Public Works Chief Administrative Officer
Ke ne J. Brothers, .Eng.
Attachments:
1. Inter - Municipal Transit Proposal- Appendix 1
2. Proposal #1 Service Schematic — Appendix 2
6
PWA 60 -2010
June 23, 2010
Background
'l'he Region has 53.1 million in capital funds allocated in 2010 for the purpose of purchasing
transit buses. . \n operating plan is vet to be finalized, pending resolution of goveriance and
financing issues. The Region's consultant is preparing a report which will include a
proposed inter - municipal schedule with financial forecasts and governance
recommendations.
Proposal
\While the Re. ginn progresses with their analysis, it is worth considering the introduction of a
"I'ri -city transit pilot project, between the downtown terminals of the existing three transit
providers, with increased frequencies to Fort F.ric and Port Colborne. This pilot project
would run for a three year term, which would allow all the stakeholders sufficient time to
market and monitor the service to determine its long term feasibility. The viability of this
pilot project proposal is based on the capital and operating costs being assumed by the
Region.
'1 he adv:nitages of proposal 1 (downtown) should be:
1 .(err'.+
INTERMUNICIPAL TRANSIT
PROPOSAL 1 (Downtown) - May 11, 2010
r it would demonstrate leadership in the public transit sector, Which could in turn
encourage the expansion of (if) service.
\dditional manpower and buses would be required but they could be put into
operation by the three existing providers with no large overhead increases.
r 11 would provide accurate insight into a large portion of the potential inter - municipal
transit market.
The three downtown terminals are currently used by intercity- bus operators, allowing
for intercity corrections.
it would provide much greater public transit availability between the Region's larger
Population centers.
it is recommended that the fstrchnxes in the new inter- municipal buses have data collection
capacity, the ability t<l issue transfers, read multi -trip magnetic cards and are Smartcard ready.
The three transit operators would charge the same fare to any inter - municipal passengers.
New farcboxcs have the capacity to provide detailed usage and revenue information if the
suitable software is installed at each point they are dumped. Each operator would
periodically credit the Region for revenues collected, based on the farebox data collected.
APPENDIX 1
The plan is for hourly service between each city pairing. '\Iondac to Saturday from 7 a.m. to
9 p.m.. Work would be equalized between the drivers of each of the three existing transit
operators. It is possible that additional late evening trips may be required coming out of
Niagara Falls during the summer. There is time allowed in the attached schedule for 6
stops per trip. Connections to Fort Eric and port Colborne would be improved by virtue of
the increase in frequency and quicker travel tines between terminals. In addition, the
following schedule improvements would be introduced to these feeder services:
/r1Lru 1 'r,//s — 1 'u17 1 ;17t'
• 7 round trips daily, i\Iondac — Saturday, rear round, some exceptions during holiday
periods.
11' e /lintel -- I'a✓7 Colborne
• 6 round trips daily, 1\londay Saturday, rear round, some exceptions during; holiday
periods.
No Sunday or holiday schedule has been developed because of the limited local transit
connections currently available on these days.
It would he advantageous for inter - municipal buses to stop at existing transit stops. .1
credit allowance to transit operators could be determined to account for diversion of existing
transit customers to the inter municipal buses.
Brack and , \/ j' n l (.n / /i'e,e Schedales
The existing departures/arrivals at Brock and the two Niagara College campuses would
remain unaffected by the introduction of this Cri -cite proposal assuming 00 changes are
made to the existing contracts between the students' unions and the existing transit
operators. It would be up to the Region to determine whether to charge the students'
unions an extra fee for the availability of new inter - municipal departures between terminals.
IZe.,iirrrce$ IZer // /
I t would be best to have $ accessible buses capable of highway operation, 2 of which would
be spare. (Note the Region is planning for 7 buses, however it is felt that one spare is not
sufficient to alloy for '\I'1`° inspections, maintenance and periodic failures).
Produced on: 6/12/2010
;ach transit property would:
Provide two buses dai1v and require the equivalent of approximately, 5 additional
drivers each.
lie responsible for the licensing, insurance and maintenance of their assigned
vehicles. The two spares would be the responsibility of Niagara Falls Transit.
i Provide emergency servicing of each other's buses when necessary.
i fie responsible for obtaining the necessary permits under the Public Vehicles . \ct.
\lake employee layover facilities available to the other pro operators within their
respective downtown terminals.
r 1 :.nsurc all bus radios include frequencies of all three transit operators.
First Year Cost Surnrnart.
Initial Capital - 53.7 million for right buses
\nnual ( )perating I ,xpcnsc- 52. million
Annual ( )perating Revenue- St).R Million (based on 1.ntra estimate of new ridership)
.\nnual ( >perating 1.oss .-
1 /t. ratio ..
()lire) (
The intent is to introduce this service as soon as new buses can be delivered. It should he
noted that (roach Canada, Greyhound and (TO Transit offer frequent express service
between the Niagara falls and Si. Catharines bus terminals using the (21:: \ \' for a one sway
tar of S5.70. The Tri- (;itt service would not use the OI
'I iMCS at the terminals are designed to be customer friendly `memory schedules ". They are
subiect to modification during the pilot period, and in am cast would need to be reworked
to accommodate new demand for public transit generated by the new hospital and /or the
introduction of weekday (;O train service.
Produced on: 6/12/2010
51.9 million
Proposal
INTERMUNICIPAL TRANSIT
PROPOSAL 2 (Brock Hub) — May 11, 2010
Another option would be to improve the existing connections at the Brock Hub,
with increased frequencies to Fort 1 and Part Colborne. As with proposal 1, this option
would run as a pilot project fur a three year term. which would allow all the stakeholders
sufficient time to market and monitor the service to determine its long term feasibility.
The viability of this pilot project proposal is based on the capital and operating costs
being assumed by the Region.
'1 Iic advantages of proposal 2 (Brock 1 tub) would be:
It would provide an improved transit alternative between tit. Catharines, Niagara
Falls and \ \'ciland.
• Connections to Dort 1;tic and Port Colborne would be improved.
r
Additional manpower and buses would be required but they could be put into
operation by the three existing providers with no large overhead increases.
r 1'hr cost would be lower than Proposal 1 (17owntown).
Schedules
4
The plan is to increase the frequency on some existing routes. "Total t would be as
fo11 )\vs:
bpav 131)14,
• 17 round trips per weekday, from September to April resulting in hourly service
from approximately 7 am — 9 pm, excluding the peak morning and late afternoon
periods when service would he half booth
• 15 round trips per weekday ttotn flay to August.
• 15 round trips on Saturdays year round.
\'i,11;11 ; 1 , /l. t'o1Y I
• 7 11 wind trips daily, :\londav — Saturday, year round, some exceptions during holiday
periods.
11 e/ /run/ ( iczt ,, l Coke C:runplrs) - lirrek.
• 1(i round trips per weekday from September to April resulting in hourly service from
approximately 7 inn — 9 pm, excluding the peak morning and late afternoon periods
when service would be half houriv.
• 14 round trips per weekday from May to August.
• 1 C> round trips on Saturdays year round.
Produced on: 6/12/2010
11' i'//a,id -- 1'o19 (2o/borne
St. Catharines "Transit would assist in providing the additional trips during peak hours. St.
(:atharines Transit would also be required to operate some extras on its own existinc routes.
13/ Mk 1111!/ t�ltrt471'il ( ,!) /hit' ,$ 'hedid!S
The existing departures /arrivals at Brock and the two Niagara College campuses would
remain unaffected by the introduction of this augmented service proposal, assuming no
changes are made to the ex isting contracts between the students' unions and the existing
transit operat<,rs.
The disadvantage of this proposal is that there are increases in frequency on two routes
which are currently paid for by BI'S[" and S. \C. It would be up to the Region to determine
whether to charge the students' unions an extra fee for the availability of new departures. It
can be safely assumed that the two students' unions would make every effort to take
advantage of this situation financially.
I \ c, ru11't ( ' 4 I L 't/1lin'!!
\With the proposed schedule, 3 additional accessible buses would be required, one designated
for each transit property.
Produced on: 6/1 2/201 0
i
• 6 round trips daily, \londay Saturday, Venr round, some exceptions during holiday
periods.
It is recommended that the fareboxes in the new inter- municipal buses have data collection
capacity, the ability to issue transfers, read multi•trip magnetic cards and are timartcard ready.
The three transit operators would charge the sane standard cash fare to any inter- municipal
passengers.
New fareboxes have the capacity to provide detailed usage and revenue information if the
suitable software is installed at each point they are dumped. Each operator would
periodically credit the Region f revenues collected, based on the farebox data collected.
First Year Cost Summary
Initial (:apital - $1.4 million for three buses
Annual ( )hcrating 1 $0.92 million
Annual ( )berating Revenue 50.31 million (assuming; full revenue recuvcrc tr'un student.)
,\nnual Operating 1.ctss - S(1.61 milli/m
R /(:
ratio - .33
Produced on: 6!12/2010
LOCAL MUNICIPAL IMT
PILOT PROJECT PROPOSAL #1: ,
TRIANGLE SERVICE
Lincoln
Pelham
Wainfleet
rinsung Feeder t nk
to Port Colborne
St Catharines Pen Centre
Brock University
Niagara College
Welland Campus
..:•1...
Union Bus
Terminal f:
0
Fairview Mali
0 ut
• :
:11: •
r^
Seaway
Mall
GD
Downtown
Terminal
horold
. Niagara College
Glendale Campus
R.kai. SA
...
Niagara-On-The-Lake
RioCan Niagara Falls
Main &
Ferry Hub
x.strof Feeder 1 ink
to
fort re%
APPENDIX 2
New
.$) York
Ntagora River
Niagara Falls ),
Legend
1.11111310
IMMIX
0
Route Names
Route 1 Niagara Falls • Si Catharines
Route 2 • Niagara falls . Welland
Route 3 • St. Catharines Welland
Reference Points
*kir Direction of Travel Daktitectronal)