Michael Pacholok Director

Purchasing and Materials Management Division City Hall,18th Floor, West Tower 100 Queen Street West Toronto, Ontario M5H 2N2

Allison Phillips, Manager Professional Services

August 5, 2015 NOTICE TO POTENTIAL PROPONENTS

Request for Proposal No. 9121-15-7194

For: Steeles Avenue Grade Separation at Stouffville GO Transit Rail Corridor Environmental Assessment Study

Please review the attached document and submit your Proposal to the address noted below by the closing deadline of 12:00 noon (local Toronto time) on August 26, 2015 Proposals will not be considered unless: Received by the date and time specified above; and Received at the address specified below. Submission by facsimile or e-mail is not acceptable. Only the names of the firms submitting Proposals will be read aloud at the public opening on the date of closing.   IMPORTANT NOTICE ~ PAN AM and PARAPAN GAMES:  During the weeks preceding and during the Pan Am and Parapan Am Games (July 10‐26 and August 7‐15), traffic in the City of Toronto and surrounding areas may be significantly affected by delayed travelling times due to road closures or detours, restricted lanes, high occupancy vehicle lanes and restricted or limited parking availability, and overall increased traffic volumes.  Please note that all closing times of 12:00 each day will remain in place and there will not be any extensions granted under any circumstances due to any, or all of the above‐noted transportation or traffic considerations.  Please also notify your couriers of this information and the requirement to meet the deadlines. 

Deadline for Questions (must be in writing):

August 12, 2015 at 12:00 noon

City Contact: Melita Lee, CPPB, Senior Corporate Buyer

Purchasing and Materials Management Division (t) 416-397-4802, (f) 416-397-7779

(e) mlee3@toronto.ca For convenience you may affix the following address label to the envelope(s) containing your submission. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------

COMPANY NAME:

RFP NO.: 9121-15-7194 CLOSING DEADLINE: 12:00 Noon

(local Toronto time)August 26, 2015

DELIVER TO: Chief Purchasing Official Purchasing and Materials Management Division 18th Floor, West Tower, City Hall 100 Queen Street West Toronto, ON, M5H 2N2

The Purchasing and Materials Management Division will not be held responsible for submission documents submitted in envelope(s) that are not labelled in accordance with the above instructions. Tenders/RFQ/RFP/Sales/Disposals are advertised on the City of Toronto Website: www.toronto.ca

1 of 112

Viewing Copy

TABLE OF CONTENTS RFP 9121-15-7194

Notice to Potential Proponents ...................................................................................................................... 1 Table of Contents .......................................................................................................................................... 2 1.0 TERMINOLOGY ............................................................................................................................ 3

1.1 References to Labeled Provisions ....................................................................................... 3 1.2 Definitions .......................................................................................................................... 3 1.3 Interpretation ....................................................................................................................... 4 1.4 RFP Process Terms and Conditions .................................................................................... 5

2.0 PURPOSE ........................................................................................................................................ 5

2.1 Study Area .......................................................................................................................... 5 2.2 Background ......................................................................................................................... 7 2.3 Study Management ........................................................................................................... 15 2.4 Consultation ...................................................................................................................... 15

3.0 SCOPE OF WORK ........................................................................................................................ 16 3.1 Tasks ................................................................................................................................. 16 3.2 Roles and Responsibilities ................................................................................................ 40

4.0 PROPOSAL EVALUATION AND SELECTION PROCESS ..................................................... 44 4.1 Selection Committee ......................................................................................................... 44 4.2 Selection Criteria .............................................................................................................. 44

4.3 Selection Process .............................................................................................................. 44 4.4 Schedule of Events ............................................................................................................ 45 4.5 Clarifications ..................................................................................................................... 45 4.6 Interviews or Demonstrations ........................................................................................... 45 4.7 Evaluation Results ............................................................................................................ 46 4.8 Negotiations and Agreement............................................................................................. 46

5.0 PROPOSAL SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS .......................................................................... 47 5.1 General Overview ............................................................................................................. 47 5.2 Proposal Documentation and Delivery ............................................................................. 47 5.3 Proposal Content ............................................................................................................... 47 APPENDICES Appendix A RFP Process Terms and Conditions .................................................................................. 58 Appendix B Agreement Terms and Conditions .................................................................................... 64 Appendix C Standard Submission Forms ............................................................................................. 71 Appendix D Supplementary Submission Forms ................................................................................... 78 Appendix E Proposal Evaluation Table(s) ............................................................................................ 80 Appendix F Mandatory Experience Requirements ofr Bridge Projects Form ...................................... 82 Appendix G Phase 1 ESA – Sources of Information (Supplementary) ................................................ 83 Appendix H Data Collection Assessments ............................................................................................ 84 Appenidx I Watermain, Sanitary and Storm Water Servicing Maps .................................................. 87 Appendix A1 General Function Design Requirements ........................................................................... 89 Appendix A3 Data Collection (SUE, Engineering Survey, Geotechnical Investigation) ....................... 95 Appendix A4 Functional Design Engineering Services ........................................................................ 106

2 of 112

Viewing Copy

1.0 TERMINOLOGY 1.1 References to Labeled Provisions Each reference in this Request for Proposal to a numbered or lettered “section”, “subsection”, “paragraph”, “subparagraph”, “clause” or “subclause” shall, unless otherwise expressly indicated, be taken as a reference to the correspondingly labelled provision of this Request for Proposal (RFP). 1.2 Definitions Throughout this Request for Proposal, unless inconsistent with the subject matter or context, "Additional work" means those consulting services which are not contemplated or provided for in the scope of work set out in this RFP and any subsequent Agreement and which are expressly authorized by the Division Head or his/her designate in writing and in advance in accordance with the terms and conditions of any subsequent Agreement, and agreed to by the Vendor. "Additional work" and "additional services" shall be used interchangeably and shall have the same meaning. “Agreement” means any written contract between the City and a Proponent or any purchase order issued by the City to the Vendor with respect to the Services contemplated by this RFP, and shall be deemed to include the terms and conditions for the provision of the Services as set out in this RFP. “City” means the City of Toronto. "City Contact" means the City employee(s) designated as City Contact on the Notice to Potential Proponents for all matters related to the RFP call process. “Conflict of Interest” includes, but is not limited to, any situation or circumstance where:

(a) in relation to the RFP process, the Proponent has an unfair advantage or engages in conduct, directly or indirectly, that may give it an unfair advantage, including but not limited to having or having access to information in the preparation of its Proposal that is confidential to the City and not available to other Proponents; (ii) communicating with any person with a view to influencing preferred treatment in the RFP process including the giving of a benefit of any kind, by or on behalf of the Proponent to anyone employed by, or otherwise connected with, the City ; or (iii) engaging in conduct that compromises or could be seen to compromise the integrity of the open and competitive RFP process and render that process non-competitive and unfair; or

(b) in relation to the performance of its contractual obligations in the City contract, the Vendor’s other commitments, relationships or financial interests could or could be seen to exercise an improper influence over the objective, unbiased and impartial exercise of its independent judgement; or (ii) could or could be seen to compromise, impair or be incompatible with the effective performance of its contractual obligations;

“Council” means City Council. "EA" means "Environmental Assessment" which is a rigorous planning and engineering decision making tool, approved under the Ontario Environmental Assessment Act for municipal road projects and municipal water and waste water projects "EAA" means Environmental Assessment Act "HST" means Harmonized Sales Tax. "May" and "should" used in this RFP denote permissive (not mandatory).

3 of 112

Viewing Copy

“MFIPPA” means the Municipal Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act. "must", "shall" and "will" used in this RFP denote imperative (mandatory), meaning Proposals not satisfying imperative (mandatory) requirements will be deemed to be non compliant and will not be considered for contract award. “Project Manager” means the main contact person at the City for all matters relating to the project. “Proponent” means a legal entity that submits a Proposal. If two or more legal entities wish to submit a Proposal as a consortium, one member of the consortium must be identified as the Proponent with whom the City may enter into an Agreement, and the other member(s) must be identified as subcontractors to that Proponent. “Proposal” means an offer submitted by a Proponent in response to this RFP, which includes all of the documentation necessary to satisfy the submission requirements of the RFP. “RFP” means this Request for Proposal package in its entirety, inclusive of all Appendices and any bulletins or Addenda that may be issued by the City. “Services” means all services and deliverables to be provided by a Vendor as described in this RFP. “Solution” means a set of goods and services meeting the City’s requirements, as set out in this RFP and RFQ. “Vendor” means the successful Proponent with whom the City enters into an Agreement. "Vendor" and "Consultant" shall be used interchangeably and shall have the same meaning. 1.3 Interpretation In this RFP and in the Agreement, unless the context otherwise necessitates, (a) any reference to an officer or representative of the City shall be construed to mean the person

holding that office from time to time, and the designate or deputy of that person, and shall be deemed to include a reference to any person holding a successor office or the designate or deputy of that person;

(b) a reference to any Act, bylaw, rule or regulation or to a provision thereof shall be deemed to

include a reference to any Act, bylaw, rule or regulation or provision enacted in substitution thereof or amendment thereof;

(c) all amounts are expressed in Canadian dollars and are to be secured and payable in Canadian

dollars; (d) all references to time shall be deemed to be references to current time in the City; (e) a word importing only the masculine, feminine or neuter gender includes members of the other

genders; and a word defined in or importing the singular number has the same meaning when used in the plural number, and vice versa;

(f) any words and abbreviations which have well-known professional, technical or trade meanings,

are used in accordance with such recognized meanings;

4 of 112

Viewing Copy

(g) all accounting terms have the meaning recognized by or ascribed to those terms by the Canadian

Institute of Chartered Accountants; and, (h) all index and reference numbers in the RFP or any related City document are given for the

convenience of Proponents and such must be taken only as a general guide to the items referred to. It must not be assumed that such numbering is the only reference to each item. The documents as a whole must be fully read in detail for each item.

1.4 RFP Process Terms and Conditions This RFP process is governed by the terms and conditions in Appendix ‘A’. 2.0 PURPOSE The purpose of this Request for Proposal (RFP) document is to select a qualified professional consulting firm (Vendor) to carry out a Schedule C Municipal Class Environmental Assessment (EA) for:

The Steeles Avenue East grade separation of the Stouffville GO Transit Rail Corridor, located approximately 400 metres east of Kennedy Road. Grade Separation is to include pedestrian/cycling/multi-use connection access Steeles Ave E; and

A widening of Steeles Avenue East (4 – 6 lanes) from Kennedy Road to Midland Avenue, including, all intersections and access at or within the stated limits.

This EA will build upon the Environmental Study Report (ESR) for the Steeles Avenue East/CN Rail Grade Separation, dated May 1994, as well as, the subsequent EA Addendum, dated October 2004, which dealt with the same segment of Steeles Avenue East. The EA will consider changes to the baseline conditions that have occurred since 2004, as well as, proposed changes as a result of development conditions and governmental initiatives within the study area. The Class EA study is to be conducted in accordance with the provisions of the Municipal Class EA document, dated October 2000, as amended in 2007 and 2011 and will be carried out in accordance with the requirements of a Schedule 'C' process. Forming part of the Class EA study, the Vendor will complete a functional design of the preferred alternative design solution. Following the completion of the EA, City staff will make recommendations to the Public Works and Infrastructure Committee and City Council. Should staff recommendations receive endorsement, a Notice of Study Completion will be published and the ESR will be filed on the public record for a 30-day review period.

2.1 Study Area A map identifying both the study area and project focus area is illustrated in Figure 1. As shown, the study area is within the City of Toronto, the Regional Municipality of York and the City of Markham. Metrolinx owns and operates the Stouffville GO Transit Rail Corridor. While the Vendor needs to consider all existing and future planned government initiatives, development conditions, and traffic movements within the study area, the study will focus on:

the Project Focus area as illustrated in Figure 1; the grade separation of Steeles Avenue east at the Stouffville GO Transit rail corridor and

modifications required to meet the proposed changes as a result of development and government

5 of 112

Viewing Copy

/ municipal initiatives. Grade separation is to include pedestrian/cycling/multi-use connection access across Steeles Ave East ; and,

the widening of Steeles Avenue East (4 – 6 lanes) from Kennedy Road to Midland Avenue, including changes to all public right-of-way infrastructure, required to meet future traffic demands along Steeles Avenue East from Kennedy Road to Midland Avenue. The widening of Steeles Avenue East is to include the assessment of both the Kennedy Road and Midland Avenue intersections at Steeles Ave East.

Although the study area is defined in Figure 1, the Vendor will be responsible for determining the appropriate limits for the operational assessment and technical needs to best represent the existing and future conditions of the area.

Figure 1: Environmental Assessment Study Area

6 of 112

Viewing Copy

2.2 Background 2.2.1 City of Toronto

In January 1984, the former Municipality of Metropolitan Toronto Council approved the construction of the Steeles Avenue grade separation with the CN rail corridor. At the time, the project was exempt from requirements under the Environmental Assessment Act (EAA) and consequently, an EA process was not completed at that time. In 1985, the former Municipality of Metropolitan Toronto completed a functional planning study that assessed the grade separation and recommended that an overpass (road over rail) be constructed. The project was stalled at the time due to lack of funding. Momentum for the grade separation was triggered again in October 1993, when the Canada-Ontario Strategic Transportation Improvement Program (STIP) came into place. The STIP provided access to the former Municipality of Metropolitan Toronto for the grade separation funding to be sourced from the federal, provincial, and municipal levels. A Municipal Class EA was subsequently undertaken and in 1994, the former Metro Council adopted the recommendation that the ESR for the Steeles Avenue East/CN Rail Grade Separation be approved and filed in the public record. The recommended plan consisted of an overpass (road over rail) design on Steeles Avenue East to grade separate the road and railway tracks, a widening of Steeles Avenue East to six lanes between Kennedy Road and Midland Avenue, and other associated changes to the adjacent streets within the project area. Bicycle lanes were included in the Steeles Avenue grade separation plan between Kennedy and Old Kennedy. Following the completion of the ESR, detailed design and property acquisition was initiated with construction targeted for 1997. However, in August 1996, Metro Council deferred the construction of the grade separation for a number of reasons, including inadequate funding for property acquisition (the STIP at the time did not cover property costs), potential reduction in rail usage and, other concerns raised by adjacent property owners. The project was subsequently put on hold. Between 1997 and 2000, staff reviewed the 1994 EA and reassessed, developed and evaluated underpass options. Consultation with adjacent property owners was also carried out during this period. In October 2001, the Works Committee recommended adoption of a staff report that confirmed the previously approved (1994) overpass design. The Committee referred the report to Scarborough Community Council for consideration of the business impact of the grade separation, with a request that staff of the Economic Development, Culture and Tourism Department be in attendance at that time. In March, 2002, staff responded to the Scarborough Community Council's request for further information, summarizing the review of the economic and taxation issues related to the construction of an underpass versus an overpass. In May, 2002, staff responded to the Scarborough Community Council's request for further information and provided additional information about the life-cycle costs of constructing an underpass versus an overpass at the Steeles Avenue East/GO Transit rail crossing. In June 2002, Scarborough Community Council indicated a preference for an underpass design for the Steeles Avenue East/CN Rail Grade Separation and requested this decision to be reported to the Works Committee. Community Council also requested the Commissioner of Works and Emergency Services to update the Works Committee on the potential injurious affection impact of an underpass versus an overpass design.

7 of 112

Viewing Copy

In July/August 2002, City Council approved the Works Committee recommendation to grade separate the road/rail crossing via the underpass concept on Steeles Avenue East, between Kennedy Road and Midland Avenue. One of the conditions of Council’s approval was the execution of agreements with the directly affect property owners to limit the City's exposure to injurious affection. In May 2004, City Council authorized staff to complete the EA Addendum and waived the condition of executing legal agreements with adjacent property owners. The EA Addendum, which was completed in October 2004, revisited the preliminary design for an underpass alternative and conducted a detailed comparison between the overpass and the underpass alternatives. The preferred alternative included the following improvements:

i) Widening of Steeles Avenue East to 6-lanes plus bike lanes between Kennedy Road and Midland Avenue;

ii) Construction of a railway bridge over Steeles Avenue East; iii) Installation of a pumping station; iv) Reconstruction of Turff Avenue as a cul-de-sac; and, v) Relocation of municipal services and utilities.

In December 2004, Works Committee adopted the recommendation that an underpass grade separation be constructed with the associated design elements, as detailed in the October 2004 Addendum Report. City Council adopted Works Committee recommendations in February 2005 and a Notice of Completion was subsequently published on February 20, 2005. Due to continued funding constraints, lack of a boundary road agreement between the City and York Region, and continued uncertainty related to adjacent development plans, the grade separation has not yet been constructed. Nevertheless, the City and York Region remain committed to this project and have each supported the need for the grade separation and road widening and a willingness to fund both this EA study and the capital construction costs. Since the completion of the EA addendum in October 2004, various municipal, governmental and development initiatives have been developed within the study area and must be taken into consideration during course of this EA study. These include:

City of Toronto: Redlea Avenue and the extension of Silver Star Boulevard Environmental Assessment.

City of Toronto: Steeles – Redlea Regeneration Area Study TTC McNicoll Bus Garage EA Metrolinx: Stouffville Corridor Rail Service Expansion EA Study Metrolinx: Steeles Ave Rapid Transit System Metrolinx: Milliken GO Station Upgrade City of Markham: Milliken Centre Secondary Plan City of Markham: Midland North extension developments within Redlea Regeneration Area the area by The Global Fortune Real Estate

development Corporation: 4665 Steeles Avenue East and 3447 Kennedy Road development: The Remington Group - 4390 Steeles Avenue East

A map illustrating all known initiatives are shown in Figure 2.

8 of 112

Viewing Copy

Fig

ure

2

9 of 112

Viewing Copy

2.2.2 Redlea Avenue / Silver Star Boulevard Class EA In October 2007, the City of Toronto completed a Municipal Class EA to develop, assess and recommend transportation improvements to support planned development in the Milliken Employment District. The recommendation from the Class EA consisted of extending: 1) Redlea Avenue from Passmore Avenue to Milliken Boulevard; and 2) Silver Star Boulevard from Passmore Avenue to Midland Avenue. The City of Toronto currently is in the detailed design and construction phases for the following streets:

Milliken Boulevard from Finch Avenue East to McNicoll Avenue o Construction estimated to be completed by September 2015 o Work Type: Road Reconstruction, Watermain Replacement, Sewer Replacement,

Intersection Modifications Redlea Avenue from NcNicoll Avenue to Passmore Avenue

o Construction planned from August 2015 to October 2016 o Proposed Work Type: Road Reconstruction, Watermain Replacement, Sewer

Replacement, Intersection Modifications The Vendor shall review the completed Redlea Avenue / Silver Star Boulevard Class EA, taking into consideration the future road extensions along with all other municipal, government and development initiatives within the study area when developing alternative solutions. 2.2.3 Steeles – Redlea Regeneration Area Study The Steeles – Redlea Regeneration Study Area is approximately 10 hectares (24.6 acres) in area and is bounded by Steeles Avenue East, the Stouffville GO Train Corridor, Redlea Avenue and its proposed extension south to Passmore Avenue and the north boundary of properties on the north side of Passmore Avenue. The Milliken GO station and surface parking lot are within the Study Area. In December 2013, City Council adopted Official Plan Amendment 231 which designated lands near the Milliken GO Station and on the west side of the Stouffville GO Corridor from Employment Areas to Regeneration Areas. This decision was part of City Council's consideration of staff recommendations related to the City of Toronto's Municipal Comprehensive Review of Employment Lands. The Regeneration Areas designation, generally, provides for a broad mix of employment, institutional, residential, and parks and open space uses. Development of the lands will proceed in accordance with a framework to be established through a study that will guide redevelopment of the area through such matters as, but not limited to:

development of urban design guidelines to guide the changing character of the area; a streets and blocks plan that includes the Redlea Avenue extension, a pedestrian / cycle pathway

adjacent to the rail corridor and other appropriate pedestrian, cycling, and vehicular connections; a requirement that Redlea Avenue is extended to Passmore Avenue prior to new development

within the Regeneration Area; a land use buffer to appropriately separate residential and sensitive non-residential uses from

nearby Employment Areas; the design of any sensitive uses and buildings containing residential and other sensitive uses to

mitigate noise, vibration and other adverse effects from the Employment Areas lands and the GO Train rail corridor;

appropriate separation from the GO Train rail corridor to the east;

10 of 112

Viewing Copy

a requirement that development of residential units also provide the gross floor area of office

employment uses; and, a community services strategy to monitor the need for new community services and facilities and

local institutions as new residents are introduced.

The Steeles - Redlea Regeneration Area Study is scheduled to be completed by Fall 2015. The study will identify a comprehensive plan and public road network for the area. Should City Council endorse the study findings, the Vendor shall review the study and incorporate any traffic related recommendations from the study into the future traffic conditions of the project focus area. 2.2.4 TTC McNicoll Bus Garage EA On May 21, 2015, Toronto Transit Commission (TTC) issued a Notice of Completion for the McNicoll Bus Garage EA Study. The study includes the design of an indoor storage facility that can accommodate 250 conventional buses, a maintenance shop, a transportation office, and a bus services area. The study included a traffic impact study which took into account the completed City of Toronto Redlea Avenue / Silver Star Boulevard Class EA. The Vendor shall review the study and incorporate any traffic related recommendations from the study into the future traffic state of the project focus area. 2.2.5 Metrolinx: Stouffville Corridor Rail Service Expansion EA Study Regional Express Rail In November 2012, Metrolinx announced the expansion of the Stouffville rail corridor (GO Uxbridge Subdivision) as part of the “Next Wave” of Big Move projects. Guided by their Regional Transportation Plan, Metrolinx is proceeding to study and implement transit improvements which includes delivering Regional Express Rail (RER) to provide significant new travel choices including electrified, 15-minute service in core areas and two-way, all-day service on weekdays, during the evening and on weekends with a mix of all-stop and potentially limited stop service along the Stouffville rail corridor. In July 2014, GO Transit completed the Stouffville Corridor Rail Service Expansion Class EA for the addition of a second track along the corridor, between Scarborough Junction and Unionville GO Station. The study evaluated alternative design concepts and assessed the preferred alternative, as documented in the Environmental Study Report (ESR). Detailed design for the corridor and station improvements has initiated, with work to be delivered in a phased approach. Phase 1, which has been tendered for construction and is expected to commence in Summer of 2015, includes the double tracking of the corridor from Marilyn Avenue (north of the Agincourt GO station) to Kennedy Road South (north of Milliken GO station). The extent of work includes the construction of a second track through the current at-grade Steeles Avenue East crossing. Detailed design for Phase 2 (remaining identified corridor to be double-tracked from Scarborough Junction to Unionville Go Station) is currently also on-going, with construction anticipated to commence at the beginning of 2016. Stouffville Rail Corridor Grade Separation Program Subsequent to the completion of the July 2014 Stouffville Corridor Rail Service Expansion Class EA, Metrolinx has also initiated the Stouffville Rail Corridor Grade Separation Program. The program is set to study the feasibility of grade separating eleven at-grade crossing locations along the Stouffville GO rail corridor. It is anticipated that the program will identify up to six preferred locations to proceed through

11 of 112

Viewing Copy

EA study (Transit Project Assessment Process, Ontario Reg. 231/08) and subsequent design work. The Request to Qualify and Quote for this assignment was posted on Merx on May 6, 2015. The Grade Separation Program is being carried out with the assumption that this EA study will assess the need and preferred design for a grade separation at Steeles Avenue East. Milliken GO Station Upgrade The Milliken GO Station was originally constructed in 2005; the south end of the existing west rail side platform was extended in 2011 to accommodate 12-car trains. The station has 728 parking spaces with no immediate plans for expansion. Currently, the commuter service consists of peak period service (seven AM trains and eight PM trains). Following the completion of the Stouffville Corridor Rail Service Expansion Class EA, Metrolinx commenced the design of the Milliken Go Station upgrades as identified in the completed Class EA. Proposed station upgrades at Milliken Station include: installation of an east platform, integrated canopies, tunnels, elevators/accessible ramps, shelters, pedestrian walkways, and glycol snowmelt system. Forming part of the Milliken GO station upgrade, Metrolinx has plans to commence a site plan review exercise to provide linkage between local transit and GO service in support of the RER initiative. As part of the subject assignment, the Vendor will be required to consult with Metrolinx to review and incorporate proposed initiatives arising from the Stouffville Corridor Rail Service Expansion Study, Phase 1 of the double track implementation contract, Milliken Station upgrades and the Stouffville Rail Corridor Grade Separation Program as it applies to the Steeles Avenue grade separation. These projects, along with all other municipal, government and development initiatives within the study area must be considered when developing and evaluating alternatives. 2.2.6 Metrolinx: Steeles rapid transit system As part of their 25-year Plan for Steeles Avenue, Metrolinx has identified a rapid transit system (BRT/LRT/AGT). It is assumed that the plan for Steeles Avenue within the study area will need to protect for future rapid transit to the extent possible, but that the initial construction will not include any related facilities. This Class EA shall include consultation with Metrolinx to identify and review requirements for the protection of a rapid transit system (BRT/LRT/AGT) along Steeles Avenue East. 2.2.8 Milliken Secondary Plan The Main Street Milliken Secondary Plan Area (OPA 144) encompasses the lands generally bounded by Steeles Avenue West, the GO rail line, Kennedy Road, Denison Street and Old Kennedy Road. The Secondary Plan is intended to facilitate the development of a new, mixed-use, urban community including residential, commercial, institutional and community uses and identifies the development of a Main Street along the southern portion of Old Kennedy Road as a focus for the new community. The approved Secondary Plan contemplates, at full development, a community of approximately 1,900 dwelling units, with 4,700 residents and 51,000 square metres of commercial and retail uses. As part of the City of Markham’s new 2014 Official Plan (not yet in force), policies were introduced which provide for a comprehensive update of the Main Street Milliken Secondary Plan and an expansion of its boundaries to include contiguous lands north of Denison Street and west of Kennedy Road. The Official Plan also anticipates the integration of the Market Village/Pacific Mall/Kennedy Corners lands into the new Secondary Plan policy framework. The updated Secondary Plan is intended to further define the function of the area as a Local Centre providing a focal point for the larger Milliken Community. Local Centres provide a range of housing, employment, shopping and recreational opportunities with appropriate forms and scale that complement the surrounding community. The majority of the expanded Secondary Plan Area is also identified as an intensification area, based on proximity to transit, including GO Transit rail service. Updated population and employment forecasts, transit-supportive densities, built

12 of 112

Viewing Copy

form, block pattern, mobility (walking, cycling, transit and road network), and community needs will be addressed in the updated Secondary Plan. It is anticipated that the comprehensive review and update to the Main Street Milliken Secondary Plan area will commence in late 2015/early 2016. In the interim, the policies of the approved Secondary Plan (OPA 144) continue to apply to the subject lands.  2.2.9 Midland North Extension Municipal Class EA

The City of Markham is carrying out a Municipal Class EA that considers the extension of Midland Avenue to provide a new north-south collector road, north of Steeles Avenue East. The Midland Avenue Extension is intended to support build out of the Main Street Milliken Secondary Plan, OPA 144, as amended,

Midland Avenue currently terminates at Steeles Avenue East in the City of Toronto. The overall study area is bounded by Steeles Avenue East to the south, Kennedy Road and Denison Street to the north, Old Kennedy Road and rear lots of Manston Crescent to the east, and the Stouffville GO Transit rail corridor to the west. The study is anticipated to be completed by Fall 2015. Detailed Design is anticipated to be completed in the Summer of 2016 with construction commencing as early as Summer/Fall of 2017. The Vendor shall consult with City of Markham staff, taking into consideration the future road extensions along with all other municipal, government and development initiatives within the study area when developing and evaluating alternatives. 2.2.10 Development Applications Within the study area, there are a number of development applications that have been submitted for municipal review and approval. The Vendor shall develop, in consultation with the City’s Project manager, the City of Markham and York Region, the future traffic demand forecast based on existing conditions, as adjusted through the use of a general growth rate, approved but not yet constructed development, development applications under site plan review, and approved / on-going government initiatives. The assumptions to be used to forecast future traffic demand will not take into consideration active development applications that are seeking amendments to the Zoning Bylaw and Official Plan for densities that exceed existing permissions. Approved development and applications for site plan approval shall be reviewed and referenced by the Vendor in order to assess the impact of the undertaking on traffic and existing /proposed access arrangements to/from Steeles Avenue East. Transportation Impact Studies/Assessments that have been submitted to support development proposals will be made available to the Vendor for viewing purposes. Known development activity that will be included in the traffic modelling and/or considered as part of the design of Steeles Avenue East, includes:

1. 4390 Steeles Avenue East, City of Markham, The Remington Group ( Phase 1)

The Remington Group has prepared plans for a major multi-phased expansion of the Remington Centre located to the north of Steeles Avenue East between Kennedy Road and the Stouffville GO Rail corridor. However, portions of their long-term expansion plans are dependent on construction of the Steeles / Metrolinx grade separation. Construction of the grade separation will require utility relocation and construction detours that will temporarily impinge on the Remington site.

13 of 112

Viewing Copy

Phase 1 of the Remington proposal involves limited development that is the subject of site plan approval only. The proposal contemplates commercial development and is supported by a Transportation Impact Assessment (TIA) dated November 10, 2014. The TIA supporting Phase 1 of the development includes a proposed eastbound to northbound tunnel access from Steeles Avenue East to the Remington site as means to providing access into the site. The City of Markham has since been apprised that the proposed portal entrance is not part of the Phase 1 proposal, and on this basis, the portal entrance will not be considered as part of this EA. The Remington plan also includes a pedestrian bridge across Steeles Avenue East adjacent to the west side of the Stouffville GO Rail Corridor, and significant bike parking facilities on site (cycling is well-used in this area as an access mode to the GO station and TTC). A stormwater management facility is proposed for the Remington site; it may be connected with the Redlea Avenue storm sewer on the Toronto side. Remington also envisions TTC Kennedy buses to loop through the site on their way to the Milliken GO station.

2. 4665 Steeles Avenue East, City of Toronto

Global Fortune Real Estate Development Corporation has submitted a development application for a mixed-use development that includes 19,237 square meters of retail space together with residential and hotel units (604 and 302 units respectively). Access to the development site is proposed from Redlea Avenue via a new proposed public road at the southern portion of the site and Steeles Avenue East. MMM has been retained by Global Fortune, and has prepared a Transportation Impact Assessment dated March 2014 - Proposed Mixed-Use Development at 4665 Steeles Avenue East. The development application is currently under review by the City of Toronto, pending the completion of the Redlea Regeneration Area Study. In the event that the proposed Official Plan Amendment is approved by the City of Toronto during the preparation of this Class EA, the Vendor shall consult with the City's Project Manager to take into consideration the traffic impacts and proposed access along with all other municipal, government and development initiatives within the study area when developing alternative solutions. The inclusion of this work is considered base cost.

Anticipated development activity that will not be included in the traffic modelling and/or considered as part of the design of Steeles Avenue East, includes:

1. 3447 Kennedy Road, City of Toronto

Global Fortune Real Estate Development Corporation has submitted an application for a mixed-use development that includes 11,600 square metres of retail space together with 600 residential units. The proposed access points to the development site are from Redlea Avenue via private signalized driveway (at the southern portion of the site). The development application is currently under review by the City of Toronto, pending the completion of the Redlea Regeneration Area Study. MMM Group has been retained by Global Fortune, and has prepared a Transportation Impact Assessment Update dated March 2015 - Proposed Retail Development at Redlea Avenue, South of the Millken Go Station (3447 Kennedy Rd).

14 of 112

Viewing Copy

2. 4390 Steeles Avenue East, City of Markham, The Remington Group ( Phase 2)

 In addition to the Phase 1 site plan application from Remington as described above, a second phase that contemplates residential uses is contemplated. Phase 2 will involve amendments to the Official Plan and Zoning By-law. To accommodate future site-generated traffic demand, Remington is expected to propose a new eastbound to northbound tunnel access to take eastbound traffic from Steeles Avenue East into the site. It is anticipated that the tunnel will be proposed on the east side of the Kennedy Road intersection. At such time as the second phase of Remington’s proposal is submitted to the City of Markham, it will be up to the developer to demonstrate: 1. that the transportation network can accommodate site traffic generated by the development; and 2. the feasibility of the portal entrance and obtain the appropriate permissions and approvals from the City of Toronto, among others. Any Information regarding Phase 2 of the application will be made available to the Vendor for viewing purposes only. The tunnel access proposal into the Remington site will not be considered or analyzed in this EA study.

2.3 Study Management Staff of the Infrastructure Planning Unit will manage the project for the Transportation Services Division and will be responsible for managing the Vendor. Staff from York Region and Metrolinx will also participate in the project team for this study. The Vendor will report and meet regularly with the City's Project Manager and Project Team. Meeting dates will be determined through the Study Design upon an award to the Vendor. Meeting times will be subject to change at the sole discretion of the City. 2.4 Consultation 2.4.1 Project Team A Project Team will be formed and will consist of City staff from Transportation Services, City Planning, Public Consultation, and other divisions as required. The project team will also include York Region and Metrolinx staff. The role of the Project Team will be to provide advice and input at every stage in the planning and decision-making process and to act as a resource for the Vendor. The City's Project Manager will be responsible for coordinating the Project Team meetings. 2.4.2 Technical Advisory Committee A Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) will be formed and will consist of City staff from Transportation Services, City Planning, and Engineering and Construction Services and other divisions as required. The TAC will also include City of Markham, York Region and Metrolinx staff. The role of the TAC will be to provide advice and input at key stages in the planning and decision-making process and to act as a resource for the Vendor. The City's Project Manager will be responsible for coordinating the TAC meetings.

15 of 112

Viewing Copy

2.4.3 Public Consultation and Engagement See Section 3.1 Task 15 for details on Public and Stakeholder Consultation requirements. 3.0 SCOPE OF WORK The Vendor will be responsible for preparing an ESR in accordance with the Schedule C provisions of the Municipal Class EA document of the October 2000, as amended in 2007 and 2011. To clarify the above, the Vendor will be required to complete a Schedule C (e.g. Phases 1 to 4) Municipal Class EA for the following transportation network improvements:

a Steeles Avenue East grade separation of the Stouffville GO rail corridor, located approximately 400 metres east of Kennedy Road. Grade separation is to include pedestrian/cycling/multi-use connection access across Steeles Ave East; and,

the widening of Steeles Avenue East (4 – 6 lanes) from Kennedy Road to Midland Avenue, including changes to all public right-of-way infrastructure, required to meet future traffic demands along Steeles Avenue East from Kennedy Road to Midland Avenue. The widening of Steeles Avenue East is to include the assessment of both the Kennedy Road and Midland Avenue intersections at Steeles Ave East.

As part of this assignment, the Vendor will be required, at a minimum, to: complete functional design of the preferred alternative design to facilitate the completion of a

detailed design and tender documents. complete all Tasks stated in Section 3.1 below.

3.1 Tasks Task 1 – Study Design The first step in the study will be the preparation of a Study Design by the Vendor. The Study Design will further detail the Work Plan and Deliverables as well as the Project Schedule as submitted by the Vendor and will build upon the requirements of the RFP and the Vendor's Proposal. The Study Design shall have regard to the priority of documents and is not a mechanism to: 1) alter the Cost of Services submitted as part of the Proposal in response to this RFP; 2) alter the scope of work as outlined in Section 3.0 of this RFP; or 3) alter value added items (if any) as outlined in the Proposal submitted in response to this RFP. A Project team, the membership of which is described in Section 2.5 of this document, will review the Study Design. The Vendor must allow for two iterations of the Study Design before it is finalized. Task 2 – Problem and Opportunity Statement A clear and concise problem and/or opportunity statement will be developed to establish the purpose and rationale for identifying and undertaking the infrastructure improvements in the study focus area. The problem and/or opportunity statement should not exceed one (1) paragraph in length, but should be supported by a description of the rationale for the undertaking. The Project Team and TAC will review the problem and/or opportunity statement and the vendor will allow for one (1) iteration before it is finalized. The problem/opportunity statement shall be based on the work conducted by the City of Toronto to date and the data collection to be undertaken by the Vendor. The statement must establish the need and justification for undertaking any physical modifications as well as the magnitude of such modifications.

16 of 112

Viewing Copy

Task 3 – Data Collection and Review of Existing Conditions The Vendor will be responsible for the collection, organization, documentation and interpretation of appropriate data from City of Toronto, City of Markham, York Region, Metrolinx. The Vendor should clearly identify in the proposal the data, data collection methodologies, and inventory methodology necessary to complete this assignment. The Vendor shall prepare an inventory and description of the existing environmental conditions (physical, social, natural, cultural and economic environments as broadly defined by the EAA), including affected private and City-owned property and existing and future infrastructure, including, but not limited to;

i. Review of all relevant background materials and studies, including relevant transportation policies contained in the Official Plans, Secondary Plans, and Site, Area Specific Policies, etc.;

ii. Review of all studies being undertaken in the study area that may impact the outcome of the EA. The studies as defined in Section 2 include but are not limited to:

1. City of Toronto: 1994 Steeles Avenue East / CN Rail Grade Separation EA; 2. City of Toronto: 2004 Steeles Avenue East / GO Transit Railway Grade Separation Class

EA addendum; 3. City of Toronto: 2007 Redlea Avenue and Silver Star Boulevard Class EA; 4. City of Toronto: 2015 Redlea Regeneration Area Study 5. City of Markham 2015 Midland Avenue Extension EA; 6. City of Markham Milliken Secondary Plan; 7. Metrolinx: Stouffville GO Railway Corridor EA; 8. Metrolinx: Stouffville Double Track Expansion Part 1 Tender Package; 9. Metrolinx: Stouffville Rail Corridor Grade Separation Program - Request to Qualify and

Quote; 10. Metrolinx: Milliken GO Station Improvements; 11. TTC McNicoll Bus Garage EA; and 12. Development applications and related transportation impact Assessments studies

iii. A summary of the impact of planned and approved future development in the area, including any

transportation-related improvements required as a condition of development or zoning approval;

iv. A summary of existing traffic, cyclist and pedestrian volumes and patterns in the study area. Only current (2013 - present) traffic data should be used to represent existing conditions. The City of Toronto, City of Markham and York Region will provide all available volume data described above as well as current traffic signal timings. The traffic counts must be viewed in relation to potential changes in traffic patterns due either to new developments or recent/proposed road network modifications.

The following Traffic Turning Movement Count Data is currently being generated by the City of Toronto, City of Markham, and York Region for this study:

Birchmount Rd At Steeles Ave (Px 1363) Kennedy Rd At Steeles Ave (Px 1192) Redlea Avenue At Pacific Mall Driveway & Steeles Avenue East Splendid China Tower West Driveway At Steeles Avenue E Splendid China Tower East Driveway At Steeles Avenue E Pacific Mall Driveway At Steeles Ave E Turff Avenue At Steeles Ave E Old Kennedy Rd At Silver Star Blvd & Steeles Ave (Px 1264) Midland Ave At Steeles Ave (Px 1260)

17 of 112

Viewing Copy

Copthorne Ave At Midland Ave & Passmore Ave (Px 1565) Silver Star Blvd At Passmore Avenue Kennedy Rd At Passmore Ave & Purcell Blvd (Px 1396) Kennedy Rd At Clayton Dr Kennedy Rd at Gorvette Rd Kennedy Rd At Denison St Dension St At Clayton Dr Dension St At Gorvette Rd Dension St At Old Kennedy Rd Old Kennedy Rd At Aldergrove Dr Old Kennedy Rd At Thelma Ave Dension St At Teddingtonave

A map identifying the Turning Movement counts currently being conducted is illustrated in Figure 3 below.

Figure 3 Turning Movement Counts

All counts will be available for Weekday AM, Weekday PM and Saturday (from 7 a.m. to 7 p.m.). Traffic count data at the access driveways along Steeles Avenue East between Kennedy Rd. and Midland Ave. will be based on trip generation surveys.

v. Perform preliminary investigations and site visits of the project focus area, including but not

limited to photos of elements within the public rights-of-way, existing properties, facilities,

18 of 112

Viewing Copy

structures within and immediately adjacent to the study area and any other site investigations required to support the planning of the project. The Vendor must observe the existing condition of the project focus area from a traffic modal perspective, note the general configuration of traffic flow, and major physical/operational constraints that would prevent any alternative solutions to be considered (i.e. Accessibility for Ontarians with Disabilities requirements, building envelope, urban design requirements, major structures, slopes and gradation, public right-of-way or private property elements). Site visits must be conducted during weekday and weekend peak periods. The Vendor shall determine the time of visit based on the preliminary evaluation of traffic count data provided by the City. The Vendor must conduct a sufficient number of site visits to fully capture the performance of the existing condition. This investigation will be used to confirm the assumptions used in the traffic model, to ensure the traffic model accurately represents existing conditions. The Vendor shall document the existing field conditions for each alternative with digital photographs and maintain a photographic database. All photographs are to be labeled with location and date taken. The Vendor must document the required observations (as stated above) in a summary. The Vendor must ensure that Vendor's staff conducting the investigation is equipped will all the safety training required to conduct such work. When accessing private property, all appropriate protocols must be followed.

vi. Any additional information, including other/current traffic counts, origin/destination surveys,

site visits and observations required to realistically represent the existing operating conditions and complete the traffic analysis, should be collected by the Vendor. Realistic existing traffic volumes and patterns of all transportation modes are required to support decisions made in Phase 2 and Phase 3 of the Municipal Class EA process. Hence, additional current traffic counts, origin/destination surveys required shall be completed as part of the Data Collection and Review of Existing Conditions process if the Vendor deems the existing information provided insufficient to accurately represent the conditions within the project focus area;

vii. Contact with relevant utilities to obtain location of existing and future plant, including any

plans and schedules for rehabilitation, replacement, or upgrade;

viii. Collect base mapping, existing available Engineering Survey, applicable as-built and structural drawings to investigate the existing conditions of the study area, contact relevant utilities to obtain location of existing and future plant, including any plans and schedules for rehabilitation, replacement, or upgrade; incorporate updated utility locations (existing and future plant) into base mapping to illustrate realistic existing conditions; Confirm existing property ownership; prepare a comprehensive and up-to-date digital base map of the study area including utility base mapping based on information collected from utilities. A summary of utility discussions regarding existing locations and future plans shall be documented. Conduct SUE C and D in accordance to requirements set forth in Appendix A.1 and A. 3. All SUE C and D works are considered base cost of the study. The Vendor is required to carry out

19 of 112

Viewing Copy

the EA Study using the rationalized/up-to-date base mapping which incorporates data gathered from the SUE C and D exercises. The City will provide Engineering Survey and SUE B according to requirements set forth in Appendix A.1 and A. 3 by November 2015. Upon receipt of Survey and SUE B, the Vendor is expected to review and analyze the alternative solutions and alternative design concepts completed to-date with the Engineering Survey and SUE B to confirm feasibility and constructability and will continue to complete the MCEA phases and functional design using the Engineering Survey and SUE B data, including any additional information collected by the proponent. The extent of the Engineering Survey and SUE B includes:

Steeles Avenue East right-of-way from Kennedy Road to Midland Avenue, including all intersections. For each intersection, survey and SUE B is to extend 50 metres beyond each intersection leg.

Stouffville GO Rail Corridor: Steeles Avenue East at-grade crossing – 300 metres north and south along the Corridor

Private Property o To the extent as displayed in the 2004 Steeles Ave East/GO Transit Railway

Grade Separation ESR - Road Underpass Detour Design Plan and Road Underpass Preliminary Property Plan as outlined in Appendix A4 and A5 of the 2004 Addendum

ix. Gather existing available geotechnical/Engineering data for the affected area. Information to be

provided by the City and will be used to supplement data collected by the Vendor;

x. Conduct Phase 1 ESA in accordance with the CSA’s Phase 1 ESA Standard Z768-01, which consists of the following work tasks:

Records review including, but not limited to aerial photographs and geological and

topographical maps; Request to OPTA Environmental Services for any fire insurance records for all

areas/properties proximate to each alternative; Request the Ontario Ministry of the Environment and Climate Change (MOECC) and

the Technical Standards and Safety Authority (TSSA) for any records of the sites; Request the City of Toronto for any records of the sites; Review available environmental databases and records, including an EcoLog ERIS

search report; Review of previous EA reports and existing title searches, if made available; A City directory search must be completed for properties within the focused study

area. A windshield reconnaissance of the sites; and, Evaluation of information and preparation of the report provided herein. Confirm presence of nearby landfills – active or closed.

The Phase 1 ESA Study Area must be comprehensive enough to identify sources of potential contamination from adjacent properties. Refer to Appendix G for examples of sources information to assist with the information gathering. This is not an exhaustive list and the Vendor is required to use due diligence in data collection for Phase 1 ESA analysis.

20 of 112

Viewing Copy

A Phase 1 ESA does not include sampling or testing of air, soil, groundwater, surface water or building materials.

xi. Drawing from the results of the Phase 1 ESA and any available existing Geotechnical data, the

Vendor will be responsible for conducting the geotechnical, soil chemical, and hydro-geological investigations appropriate to the study requirements set out in this section. This data will be collected early on in the study to inform the evaluation of alternatives. Refer to Appendix A.1 and A.3 for requirements. In addition to Appendix A.3, the Vendor must conduct sufficient geotechnical, soil chemical, and hydro-geological investigations including borehole sampling and analysis along the City's existing road network, proposed bridge foundation locations, affected private properties, and affected rail corridor to determine existing subsurface conditions required for the design of the proposed bridge foundations & superstructures, retaining wall structures, utility relocations and pavement design. Boreholes shall be located strategically to define subsurface conditions over the extents of the study area. Where possible, boreholes/explorations shall be located to minimize disruption to traffic. For the purpose of pricing, the following Boreholes and Coreholes shall be completed and considered base scope of work:

3 Boreholes within the stated focus study area – City right-of-way, drilled to a minimum depth of 7 metres

2 Boreholes along the Stouffville Rail Corridor ( one north of Steeles Avenue East, one south of Steeles Avenue East) to a minimum depth of 7 metres

1 Borehole per approximate bridge foundation location is required to a depth of refuse (this depth has been encountered in the general area to be 15 m).

3 Coreholes for the purpose of asphalt asbestos testing within the stated focus study area

In addition to Appendix A.3, the geotechnical, soil chemical, and hydro-geological investigations shall be completed to recommend the following:

Levels of sub-surface water levels and soil suitability from a geotechnical

perspective, concluding any design and cost constraints to construct the alternative solutions in the study based on the investigation conducted thus far,

Level of soils and groundwater contamination that require removal and treatment if excavated - based on the boreholes conducted thus far. Determine unit cost and quantity of contaminated, hazardous material that requires delivery to a registered receiving site if excavated. Determine the unit cost and quantity of contaminated, non-hazardous excavated material that requires delivery to an appropriate receiving site if excavated. Determine the unit cost and quantity of non-contaminated, non-hazardous excavated material to be disposed off site as clean material if excavated.

The geotechnical, soil chemical, and hydro-geological investigations stated above is considered base scope and shall be included in the base cost of the EA study. Provisional Item: Additional geotechnical, soil chemical, and hydro-geological investigations

21 of 112

Viewing Copy

Upon the identification of the Preferred Alternative Design Concept, additional geotechnical, soil chemical, and hydro-geological investigations may be required base on consultation with the Vendor's geotechnical and soils expert and the City's Project Manager. A Soil Management Plan (SMP) in accordance with the Environmental Protection Act may be required. If required, the plan must:

o Specify the safe disposal of excavated soil and groundwater from the study

area; o Perform specific investigations including an investigation of the vertical and

horizontal extent of contaminated and/or hazardous soils on the site and profiling of the soil to assess the extent of impacted material and the type of impacts to the proposed alternative solutions;

o Determine the quantity of contaminated, hazardous excavated material to be taken to a registered receiving site, and determine the quantity of contaminated, non-hazardous excavated material to be taken to an appropriate receiving site and determine the quantity of non-contaminated, non-hazardous excavated material to be disposed off site as clean material; and

o Assess the quality and quantity of the groundwater that may be drawn from the excavation in order to determine disposal requirements.

Provisional bore holes to be drilled to a minimum depth of 10 metres shall be provided in accordance to the requirements set forth in appendix A.1 and A.3. In addition, cost of the additional bore holes shall be inclusive to include all labor, equipment & material mobilization, traffic control, all required geotechnical, soil chemical, hydro-geological, & infiltration testing, analysis, report submission and recommendation including the completion of the Soil Management Plan. The Vendor shall provide a provisional price for 2 (two) bore holes. The price will be used to establish the unit cost per borehole. The City, at its sole discretion, shall have the ability to determine the number of additional bore holes to be carried out. Regardless of the number of additional bore holes to be carried out, the above requirements regarding the completion of the Soil Management Plan shall be met.

Bore hole pricing must reflect a worst case scenario for type of equipment and safety measures required to protect workers in situations such as the presence of methane, etc.

xii. Inventory of the natural environment, including, air quality, noise, natural heritage features, wildlife, vegetation, surface water features , existing heritage features, surrounding cultural landscape, etc… The Vendor shall review the environmental condition assessments completed from approved Environmental Assessments within the Study Area. The Vendor shall reference findings as applicable and conduct further analyses to ensure that the study area's existing environmental conditions are fully assessed, as broadly defined by the EAA and MCEA. At a minimum, the Vendor shall conduct the following assessments. The noted assessments are considered base scope and no additional payments are to be provided unless otherwise noted. The requirements of the assessments are stated in Appendix H.

Air Quality Screening Assessment Natural Environment and Natural Heritage Assessment Cultural Heritage and Culture Heritage Landscape Screening Assessment Archaeological Assessment Socio- Economic and Land Use Characteristics Assessment Tree Inventory Plan and Arborist Report

22 of 112

Viewing Copy

xiii. Contacting other relevant external organizations to establish existing service and future plans,

including, but not limited to Metrolinx/GO Transit and the Ministry of Transportation (MTO); and, xiv. Reviewing Collision data - to obtain collision information, the Vendor will be required to review

Motor Vehicle Accident reports for the last 5 years at the City’s Collision Data Centre and provide a summary of the findings. The analysis of collision information should be summarized in collision diagrams for the study area in sufficient enough detail to identify any safety or operational concerns including pedestrians & cyclists and TTC operations.

The Vendor will make specific requests through the City of Toronto's Project Manager for information from other relevant City Departments and Divisions and external organizations regarding existing service and future plans, including, but not limited to the Toronto Transit Commission (TTC), Metrolinx (GO Transit), York Region, the City of Markham. A list of the data that will be provided by the City is included in Section 3.2 document.

Task 4 Data Assembly and Analysis Assessment of Alternative Solutions In order to develop appropriate alternative solutions and a detailed assessment of each of the alternative solutions, the Vendor will be responsible for compiling the material outlined in Task 3 and analyze the data including, but limited to the following:

i. Analyze the existing traffic performance within the study focus area, including the analysis of roadway and intersection performance. Reviewing the Collision data provided by the City. Identifying existing traffic, pedestrian and cyclist operations and safety concerns within the study area. Weekday AM , PM, and Saturday peak hours will be analyzed;

ii. Analyze the operations of existing and future intersections. The area for analysis consists of

intersections at or within the project focus area and any critical intersections identified through the course of the study, including all proposed new intersections or access mentioned in any government plans or development initiatives;

iii. Forecast future traffic demands and patterns (vehicle, pedestrian and cyclist forecasts) for both

interim and long-term planning horizons, based on known government plans and development initiatives, and supportable estimates of background traffic growth, as well as any alternative plans that may emerge through the current study. The Vendor shall develop the future traffic demand forecast based on existing conditions, as adjusted through the use of a general growth rate, approved but not yet constructed development, development applications under site plan review, approved / on-going government initiatives, in consultation with the City’s Project Manager. The assumptions to be used to forecast future traffic demand will not take into consideration active development applications that are seeking amendments to the ZBL and OP for densities that exceed existing permissions.

iv. Conduct an operational analysis for all existing and future intersections, including the intersections

at or within the project focus area. Weekday AM , PM, and Saturday peak hours will be analyzed;

v. Conduct existing and future intersection capacity analyses using Synchro/SimTraffic software. Analysis parameters shall reflect the City of Toronto’s “Guidelines for Using Synchro Software". Weekday AM , PM, and Saturday peak hours will be analyzed;

vi. Identify any future traffic deficiencies within the study area for the existing road network including

a transportation system-wide assessment to determine the broader impacts of traffic redistribution

23 of 112

Viewing Copy

that may occur as a result of the options under study and must assess the impacts to new and existing signals;

vii. Provide signal warrants for the new intersections as well as rationale regarding signal spacing and

availability of clear sight lines;

viii. Analyze the assessments completed in Task 3 depicting the existing environmental conditions, as broadly defined by the EAA, the potential impacts of alternative solutions and the preferred solution to the environment and the measures needed to mitigate impacts to the environment;

ix. Review Geotechnical/Engineering and Soil Contamination data collected and identify the potential

locations of Geotechnical and Soil issues within the project focus area;

x. Review data collected via site visits, adjacent property information, available development plans, future government initiatives. Analyze impacts that the alternative solutions being developed will have on adjacent private properties or properties owned by government/agencies other than the City of Toronto. Impacts to consider will include but are not limited to detour plans to maintain rail service along the Stouffville GO Transit Rail Corridor and traffic movements along Steeles Avenue East;

xi. Coordinate with the City's Project Manager and Metrolinx to analyze the following for each

alternative solution:

Confirm the proposed rail corridor expansion plans along the Stouffville GO Transit Rail Corridor at Steeles Avenue East, including proposed improvements to the Milliken Station. At a minimum, the following must be confirmed:

i. Determine clear zone requirements: Horizontal and vertical clearances for trains for both underpass and overpass alternatives;

ii. Confirm the width of rail corridor; iii. The need to protect for the future electrification infrastructure along the

Stouffville corridor and what requirements should be assumed; iv. Identify staging requirements for any bridge/rail construction/interface. Identify

road and rail detour requirements with-respect-to cost and duration; v. Assess the specific impacts associated with all other disciplines including land

use, urban design, natural heritage, archaeology and built/cultural heritage; and vi. Requirements to maintain rail service and operations during construction.

Task 5 – Identification of Alternative Solutions The Vendor will develop a list of alternative solutions for the transportation infrastructure required to support existing and future conditions in the study focus area. The alternative solutions will take into consideration data collected and analyzed as part of Task 4. Steeles Avenue East / Stouffville GO Transit Rail Corridor Grade Separation The Vendor shall review and build upon the Steeles Avenue East/CN Rail (Metrolinx) Grade Separation ESR, dated May 1994 as well as the subsequent EA Addendum, dated October 2004. The Vendor must review and update the rationale for the need to grade separate road and rail. The Vendor must review and update, where appropriate, the criteria used to evaluate the overpass and underpass options. The Vendor must at a minimum incorporate new considerations to the evaluation given changes to the study area since 2004 and any future considerations based on municipal, governmental and development plans and initiatives. At a minimum, the following new items must be considered:

24 of 112

Viewing Copy

Metrolinx rail expansion plans Combined grade separated pedestrian /cycling/multi-use connection , providing safe,

convenient and direct access for pedestrians and cyclists across Steeles Avenue East and to/from the Milliken GO Station

Metrolinx rapid transit plan along Steeles Avenue Development that has occurred since 2004

The alternative solutions will be developed with input from the TAC but is expected to include: 1. Overpass; 2. Underpass; and 3. Do Nothing. Under all alternatives, consideration should be given to opportunities to improve pedestrian / cyclist route connectivity, safety, and public realm through the study focus area, as well as transit priority. All alternative solutions must at a minimum consider all planned road configurations, as stated in Section 2.2. Steeles Avenue East Widening: Kennedy Road to Midland Avenue Alternative solutions will be developed with input from the TAC and shall, at a minimum, consider the following issues and opportunities:

Widening Steeles Avenue East from 4 lanes to 6 lanes; Improving of traffic capacity and service at the Steeles Avenue East and Kennedy Road

intersection ( i.e. designated westbound right turn); Improving traffic capacity and service at the Steeles Avenue and Midland Avenue

intersection; and Providing increased eastbound left turn capacity at Steeles Avenue East and Redlea Avenue

(e.g. double left-turn); and Streetscaping improvements and public realm enhancements along Steeles Avenue East.

All alternatives will need to recognize and reflect the physical, property, operational, topographic, structural, and cost constraints present at and around the site. Under all alternatives, consideration should be given to opportunities to improve pedestrian / cyclist route connectivity, safety, and public realm through the study focus area, as well as transit priority. All alternative solutions must at a minimum consider all planned road configurations, as stated in Section 2.2. In addition to City of Toronto, City of Markham, York Region, and Metrolinx policies and standards shall be adhered to, with due consideration given to the potential acceptability of any innovative concept. Any innovative design concept not entirely covered in applicable policies and standards will be subject to review and approval. All alternatives will need to consider the detour arrangements required to maintain rail service along the Stouffville GO Rail Corridor and traffic movements along Steeles Avenue East. For each alternative solution, plan, profile, and typical cross section drawings shall be provided at a scale of 1:500. The drawings should be developed to a level of detail adequate to allow a full understanding of its layout, operations, potential utility impacts, Right of Way limits, property impacts, and structural requirements, as a basis for a comprehensive and comparable analysis process. Included in the list of alternative solutions is the “Do Nothing” alternative. For the purposes of this study, the “Do Nothing” alternative consists of the existing road network in the study area. Adequate time should be allocated to account for iterations in the development and refinement of the alternative solutions, both during the evaluation process and in response to the review by the TAC and comments received through the public consultation process.

25 of 112

Viewing Copy

Task 6 - Evaluation of Alternative Solutions Evaluation Criteria The Vendor will be responsible for carrying out a comparative evaluation of the alternative solutions that are identified. The criteria, indicators and measures used to evaluate the alternative solutions will be determined with input from the TAC and should include, but not be limited to:

Transportation

existing and future traffic conditions; overall safety and service; ability to accommodate pedestrians, cyclists and commercial vehicles; impacts to public transit; and, impacts to emergency services vehicles.

Socio-Economic Environment

changes in access; impacts on existing land uses and on proposed developments; impact to emergency services; noise and vibration; create new parcels appropriate for new development; ability to support proposed land use; streetscape improvements; and, property requirements and impacts.

Natural Environment

Ability to meet the criteria in the Wet Weather Flow Master Plan; Impacts to aquatic and terrestrial habitats; Environmentally Sensitive Areas (ESA); Endangered species; Areas of Natural and Scientific Interest (ANSI); Vegetation; Habitat (wildlife); and Air Quality

Cultural Environment

archaeological resources; built heritage features; and cultural heritage landscapes.

Engineering and Costs

utility relocation ; capital costs; operation and maintenance; property acquisition costs; construction feasibility and staging; and,

The evaluation shall identify the magnitude of the net positive and negative effects of each alternative solution for each evaluation criterion and identify mitigating measures to minimize or eliminate impacts on all identified environmental factors. The methodology in which the alternative solutions are evaluated will also be determined with input from the TAC.

26 of 112

Viewing Copy

When forming the comparative evaluation of the alternative solutions, the Vendor shall be responsible to conduct the following analyses, forming the basis of the information presented within the category of Engineering and Costs.

i. A comparative assessment between the proposed alternative solutions, noting key differences in elements contributing to differences in capital/operating costs.

ii. A comparative assessment between the proposed alternative solutions, noting key differences in elements contributing to costs as it relates to Geotechnical and Soil contamination issues, utility relocations, impacts to private property (depicting area and potential magnitude of property acquisition, temporary/permanent easement requirements), major construction staging requirements.

iii. All alternative solutions proposed must be feasible from a construction perspective. The Vendor must summarize key constraints contributing to feasibility issues for each alternative solution and potential impacts of such constraints on cost and timing/method of construction.

The assessments shall be accompanied by high level costing for all alternative solutions broken down to the following categories: Capital Cost, Operating Cost, Utility Relocation Cost, Geotechnical and Soil remediation Cost, Property Impact Cost and Staging and Detour Cost. It is expected that the " Alternatives Analysis and Preferred Alternative Design" assessment in Task 8 will be used to support the evaluation of the Alternative solution. Technical Memo No. 1 will be prepared to document the analyses completed and recommendations arising from the completion of Tasks 1 to 6, which include but are not limited to:

an inventory of existing conditions, including all assessments and reports as required in Task 3; a problem and/or opportunity statement; data assembly and analyses; Identification of alternative solutions; evaluation criteria; a description of the evaluation methodology; and the evaluation of alternative solutions.

The Vendor should allocate sufficient time for the TAC to review and comment on Technical Memo No. 1. Task 7 – Identification and Confirmation of the Preferred Solution

Based upon the evaluation of the alternative solutions, one alternative solution shall be selected as the preferred solution or preferred transportation network alternative. The preferred solution shall be defined in terms of public right-of-way width, alignment, and location, and transportation functions to be contained within that proposed right-of-way. The preferred network shall also summarize issues that need to be examined further in the alternative design phase. They include, but are not limited to:

Horizontal and vertical alignment Utility impacts Drainage Geotechnical and soil contamination Property impacts Construction feasibility and staging

27 of 112

Viewing Copy

Task 8 - Watermain, Santiary, Stormwater Servicing

This analysis is to be conducted in conjunction with development of alternative solution and alternative design concepts. The analysis must be completed and used as a source of reference when evaluating the developed alternative design concepts.

The proposed road improvement and grade separation of Steeles Avenue East, will potentially impact upon the following existing infrastructure:

a 300 mm and 450 mm diameter storm sewer in between Silver Star Blvd. and Redlea Ave. (north side of Steeles Ave. E); a 250 mm, 450 mm and 525 mm diameter storm sewer in between Midland Ave. and the Stouffville Go Transit rail corridor (South side of Steeles Ave. E); a 975 mm diameter storm sewer at the intersection with Redlea Ave., and a 675 mm diameter storm sewer in between Kennedy Rd. and Redlea Ave., see Map 1.

a 600/675 mm sanitary sewer (property of and servicing the City of Markham, see Map 1); and,

a 1350 mm trunk watermain supplying York Region, see Map 2;

a 300 mm local main, see Map 2;

Refer to Appendix I for Watermain, Sanitary and Storm Water Servicing Maps

The grade separation will also impact the conveyance of overland flows along Steeles Ave E from Redlea Ave. to Silver Star Blvd., and the Stouffville GO Transit rail corridor.

Analysis of the impacts and potential mitigating measures / works on the aforementioned infrastructure, adjacent properties, and overland flow, is required to facilitate the selection of the appropriate grade separation strategies and road improvements.

The City will provide any available information to the Vendor in regard to existing infrastructure in the study area. The Vendor will utilize the information obtained in Task 3, including: engineering survey, Phase 1 ESA, geotechnical investigations, and SUE B information. This information shall be used to analyze locations of:

Watermains and its appurtenances,

Sanitary and storm sewers,

Sanitary and storm maintenance holes, record inverts and pipe diameters,

The following data will be provided by Toronto Water upon the Vendor's request. It is the Vendor's responsibility to review and ensure that information and databases provided are accurate, up-to-date and complete.

Geodatabase with sanitary, combined and storm sewer networks including MH IDs, X and Y coordinates, depths and/or ground elevations of MHs, pipe lengths, sizes, shapes, materials, and invert elevations;

Geodatabase with catchbasin locations; Geodatabase with watermain network including hydrants, valves, and water lines. The Vendor

must collect water pressure data to create, if required, a new watermain model of the study area. Current population and projected populations; Aerial/ortho photography; Digital elevation model (DEM);

28 of 112

Viewing Copy

Topographical contour lines (with intervals at 0.50 m); Final Project File reports of basement flooding EA studies; and Sewer model in InfoWorks CS, version 15.5 or later, for Basement Flooding Area 31. The

Vendor must verify the model provided for accuracy of data in the area of study, and shall collect missing data and modify the model, if required, to accommodate project specific needs.

As well, any approved site development proposal plans in the study area will be provided to facilitate the assessment

Watermain

Both of the Trunk Watermains located in the project focus area are within Pressure District 5 and supply water from Toronto's Kennedy Water Pumping Station to York Region's Milliken Water Reservoir and Pumping Station.

Existing and any proposed watermains in the study area must be analyzed to determine its capacity to provide service for future demand based on population growth assumptions and appropriate design criteria. The following service condition information will be considered:

Average Day Demand (ADD);

Maximum Day Demand (MDD);

Peak Hour Demand (PHD); and,

Maximum Day Demand plus Fire Flow (MDD + FF.)

If deficiencies are identified, the Vendor shall determine necessary upgrades to the system to accommodate future demands. Any recommendation to upgrade, relocate or for new infrastructure must be in compliance with MOECC regulations for watermain system upgrades and must be reviewed by the City prior to acceptance.

The City of Toronto Design Criteria for Sewers and Watermains (November, 2009) must be used for the analysis and design of watermains.

Gravity Sewers and Stormwater Management

Existing and any proposed sanitary sewers in the study area and downstream upon to a defined area must be analyzed for the following scenarios:

pre-construction sanitary flow under design conditions or Dry Weather Flow (DWF);

post-construction sanitary flow under DWF conditions;

pre-construction sanitary flow under extreme wet weather conditions; and,

post-construction sanitary flow under extreme wet weather conditions.

Pre- and post-construction sanitary flows will be based on population growth assumptions based on census data to be provided by the City.

To define the extent of the area downstream to be analyzed, a Hydraulic Grade Line (HGL) analysis must be carried out to compare pre- and post-construction hydraulic conditions. The Vendor must demonstrate that the HGL for post-construction conditions will not be higher than the one for pre-construction conditions in the study area. If the post- construction HGL is significantly higher than pre-construction, the Vendor shall continue with the analysis downstream of the study area up to a point where the difference is not significant.

29 of 112

Viewing Copy

The study area is located within a portion of City designated Area 31 under the City's Basement Flooding Protection Program. Information about this program can be found at:

http://www1.toronto.ca/wps/portal/contentonly?vgnextoid=51e28da78b151410VgnVCM10000071d60f89RCRD

In addition, it should be noted that the City completed a basement flooding study analysis titled "Investigation of Chronic Basement Flooding, Sewershed Area 31" (GENIVAR, January 2011.) The study did not identify any concern in the area and did not recommend any sewer work for implementation.

Existing and any proposed storm sewer in the study area and downstream upon to a defined area must be analyzed as well. Assessment of the area draining into and out of the study area in all events up to a 1:100 year return storm will be required, both to verify that adverse impacts to existing infrastructure and properties will not be created by the grade change, and to allow the design team to develop a range of design flows (from frequent 24 hour events such as 10 mm, 20 mm, and 30 mm, and 1:2, 1:5, 1:10, 1:25, 1:50, and 1:100 year design storm events) to facilitate a life cycle cost analysis of alternatives.

The study area is located in the boundary of the cities of Toronto and Markham. The Vendor shall verify that all catchment areas draining south from the City of Markham towards the study area are correctly delineated and included in the analysis of storm sewers. The City's Project Manager will work with the City of Markham to obtain any existing data, plans, etc… that are needed to confirm this.

The Vendor shall consider in the analysis of storm sewers in the study area any discharge proposed for stormwater management in the Stoufville Corridor Rail Services Expansion project owned by GO Transit. The Vendor shall consult the stormwater management report prepared by AECOM on May 6, 2015 or later version.

A conceptual or high-level analysis must be undertaken to derive a stormwater management plan to achieve water quality and quantity control. Any Municipal Class Environmental Assessment requirements for new and/or upgraded infrastructure within the Study Area will be identified and/or addressed through the analysis.

The City will provide data as to the frequency of the referenced 10 mm, 20 mm, and 30 mm storms; Total Suspended Solids (TSS) particle size distribution, settling velocities, and event mean concentration.

The following guidelines and standards must be used for the analysis of storm sewers and development of stormwater management strategies:

City of Toronto Design Criteria for Sewers and Watermains (November, 2009)

City of Toronto Wet Weather Flow Management (WWFM) Plan, Policy and Guidelines (November, 2006 or latest available version at the time of tendering)

Toronto Green Standards (TGS) December, 2010)

Ontario Ministry of the Environment (MOE) Stormwater Management Planning and Design Manual (MOE, 2003)

Ontario Ministry of Transportation Highway Drainage Design Standards (MTO, 2008)

Ontario Ministry of Transportation Drainage Management Manual (MTO, 1997)

TRCA's Low Impact Development Guidelines

ASCE 38-02 - Standard Guidelines for the Collection and Depiction of Existing Subsurface Utility Data

30 of 112

Viewing Copy

Alternatives Analysis and Preferred Alternative Design (to be completed as part of Phase 2 and 3 of the EA process)

For the analysis of alternatives for either new or relocated watermains, sanitary sewers, storm sewers and stormwater management strategies, the Vendor shall:

Develop a set of screening criteria from which to evaluate each alternative solution.

Evaluate the alternative solutions against the defined screening criteria and make a selection of preliminary preferred solutions.

The screening criteria may include impacts to the natural environment, technical (e.g. feasibility of space, accessibility for maintenance and operation, construction requirements, effectiveness in controlling flooding of the project focus area and surrounding areas, improvement in stormwater quality), and economic considerations (e.g. high level capital cost.)

Re-evaluate or confirm and finalize the preliminary preferred solutions by taking into consideration input and comments received from the City, regulatory agencies, and the public.

Prepare a Servicing Report to be included as part of Technical Memorandum #2 to present the preferred solution(s), including the evaluation criteria.

Development of Preferred Conceptual Design ( to be completed as part of the Functional Design)

The preferred solution for the watermain, sanitary sewer, storm sewer, and stormwater management practice shall be completed to the level of detailed conceptual design to confirm its constructability, functionality, and feasibility. The Vendor shall provide design notes, plans and profiles.

A life cycle cost analysis will be required especially in cases where pumping station facilities are considered for servicing the study area to help in making decisions on the selection of a preferred solution. The life cycle costing analysis required at this stage would be based on simple estimates of:

Acquisition costs, including land purchases or easements;

Construction, installation and commissioning costs;

Operating costs or annual cost for energy consumption;

Maintenance costs including corrective, preventive and predictive;

Disposal costs.

A life span of 50 years must be considered.

The Vendor shall summarize the detailed conceptual designs in the Functional Design Report to be submitted to the City as part of Task 11, including, but not limited to, the following:

Capital and Life Cycle cost;

Land and easement requirements;

Impact on current and future land use;

Operational issues, concerns;

Capacity, performance and efficiency;

Site constraints, constructability challenges, and rehabilitation/cleanup costs if required;

31 of 112

Viewing Copy

Design and construction timeline;

Mitigation measures.

The Servicing Report is not intended to consider the needs of servicing changes or upgrades from any proposed development, but the analysis of the future and ultimate conditions is to analyze the infrastructure modifications required to facilitate the transportation network changes taken into account long term future growth of the study area.

Task 9 – Development and Evaluation of Alternative Design Concepts Alternative design concepts will be developed for the preferred alternative solution(s) identified. Designs should be developed in sufficient detail to establish the potential physical and operational impacts, to identify and develop suitable mitigating measures, and to establish a comprehensive cost estimate. This should include identification of all property requirements, as well as the identification of all utility impacts, impacts on adjacent roads, impacts to rail operations and any other impacts on existing conditions. The cost estimate and priority/phasing of implementation on the preferred design concept(s) will be determined.

The Vendor will be responsible for developing and evaluating alternative designs. The criteria, indicators and measures used to evaluate alternative designs will be determined with input from the TAC and should build off, but not be limited to, the evaluation criteria listed in Task 6.

Adequate time should be allocated to account for iterations in the development and refinement of the alternative designs, both during the evaluation process and in response to the review by the TAC and comments received through the public consultation process. These designs should be developed at a scale of 1:500.

For each improvement noted above, drawings in the form of plan, profile, and typical cross sections must be provided for each developed alternative design concept to illustrate at a minimum:

Alignment (curve radius, speed, ISD);

Profile (curve radius, speed, SSD);

Cross Section: Road widths, Bicycle/multi-use lane widths, Boulevard widths, side/back slope, erosion control, ( for streetscape/furnishing area and pedestrian throughway area),

Right-of-way widths and area of private property impacts (land acquisition, terrain);

Private property building envelop;

Utility locations, impacts, and location of proposed utility relocations (including Toronto Water assets – Watermain, Storm sewer, and Sanitary sewer).

Location of soil contamination area(s);

Traffic signals and pavement markings;

Bridge Components, including, but not limited to: Foundation type, Substructure type, girder size, deck size, retaining walls)

32 of 112

Viewing Copy

Rail Components, including, but not limited to: Track, Track diversion, Grading, ballast, signal,

switch, Relocation of signalized intersection for road and rail crossing, Pump Station.

The Vendor is required to use expertise in the design process to ensure the design of complete streets and bridge structures. The streets should be designed to perform a diverse role and balance the spatial needs of existing and future users within the right-of-way. This includes pedestrians, people with mobility aids, transit, bicycles, automobiles, utilities and landscaping. The Vendor shall also confirm the feasibility of each design concept by ensuring that appropriate traffic detour and staging requirements can be met such that all transportation modal operations including road and rail can be maintained at an acceptable level during construction.

Engineering costs, capital costs property costs, utility relocation costs, detour & staging costs must be considered. Alternative designs are to be evaluated using appropriate criteria and measures to identify a preferred design. As part of the evaluation of the alternative designs, the Vendor shall be responsible for completing the following analyses. These analyses will form the basis of the information presented when evaluating the Engineering and Costs component.

i.A preliminary assessment of the capital costs required to construct the alternative designs. The assessment will include but not limited to:

Capital cost requirements on a per work type basis (i.e. road reconstruction, bridge construction, and any road infrastructure related replacements), with supporting unit cost breakdown provided.

ii.A preliminary assessment of the maintenance and operation costs required to upkeep the alternative

designs. The assessment will include but not limited to: Life cycle analysis on a per work type basis – corrective, preventive, and

predictive works (i.e. road reconstruction, bridge maintenance, and any road infrastructure related replacements), with supporting unit cost breakdown provided. A life span of at least 50 years must be considered.

iii. A preliminary geotechnical and soil condition assessment. The assessment will include but not

limited to: Identifying potential locations of Geotechnical and Soil issues within the study

area; Identifying the impacts that the existing Geotechnical and Soil conditions will

have on the alternative designs being considered, including high level costing required to remediate the soil condition for each alternative design solution.

iv. A preliminary utility impact assessment. The assessment will include but not limited to: Identifying existing utilities and any future utility rehabilitation/expansion plans

within the project focus area; Identifying the impacts that the alternative design solutions being considered will

have on the existing utilities and future utility rehabilitation/expansion plans, including high level costing on a per utility basis required to relocate or upgrade plant, with supporting unit cost breakdown provided. The Proponent will be required to consult with affect utilities to complete this analysis.

v.A preliminary property impact assessment (Private properties or properties owned by government/agencies other than the City of Toronto). The assessment will include but not limited to:

Identifying impacted properties within the project focus area;

33 of 112

Viewing Copy

Identifying the impacts that the alternative designs being considered will have on

the existing properties, including high level property acquisition area/costing or proposed temporary/permanent easement area on a per property basis required to facilitate the implementation of the proposed alternative solutions. The Proponent will complete this analysis with consultation with the City's Real Estate Division.

vi. A preliminary assessment of the construction feasibility and construction staging requirements for

each alternative design. The assessment will include but not limited to:

Identifying any construction feasibility issues deterring the alternative designs from being implemented ( i.e. property related issues depicting the area of property acquisition or easements required to construct the stated alternative, requirements to relocate significant amount of utilities in order to implement the proposed solution)

Identifying the construction staging and traffic detour requirements, including time frame of construction for the alternative designs. The assessment shall include cost associated with building and maintaining such traffic detour requirements (on a per work type basis), including operational impact cost to Metrolinx/CN due to impacts to rail service.

Task 11 - Identification and Assessment of the Preferred Alternative Design Concept The preferred Alternative Design Concept, including the servicing report (as required per Task 8), necessary to support existing and future conditions is to be identified and refined with appropriate mitigating measures. This shall include the identification of all property requirements as well as the identification of all utility impacts/ coordination, impacts on connecting roads & rail, traffic & rail detour, storm water management facilities, and any other impacts on the existing conditions. The Vendor shall consider all environmental factors identified as part of Task 10, and refine the preferred alternative design concept to minimize impact on the environment. Along with the preferred alternative design concept, the Vendor shall develop an impact study to identify all impacted environmental factors and note all mitigation measures taken or to be taken at various phases (detailed design, construction, operation) to minimize the stated impacts. The study shall also categorize impacts into short-term and long-term horizons and have corresponding short and long-term mitigation factors to minimize stated impacts based on the phasing of construction to implement the alternative design concept. Task 12 Implementation and Construction Phasing Plan The Vendor is required to develop an implementation plan for the various infrastructure components proposed by the Preferred Alternative Design Concept. The implementation plan should take into account future traffic conditions in the project focus area. The Implementation Plan at a minimum shall include the following assessments:

Assess, in consultation with the City's Project Manager, the time required to design and

construct each recommended infrastructure component, including time required to acquire property, relocate utilities, and conduct site remediation ( if required). The Vendor shall develop traffic detour plans to illustrate the road and rail traffic can be maintained at acceptable levels during each stage of construction.

Assess the phasing of construction works on a component by component basis taking into

account traffic improvements for the study area and allowance for developments to take place within the project focus area. The phasing of the construction works shall also take

34 of 112

Viewing Copy

into account of the current or planned capital works projects identified within or adjacent to the project fcous area, by governments or any third party utility companies, in order to minimize traffic disruptions.

Assess the traffic performance of the study area during the implementation of the

infrastructure elements to ensure that all transportation modes, including road and rail service, is maintained at levels deemed reasonable by the City.

Task 13 - Permits and Approvals The Vendor shall investigate all relevant codes, regulations and bylaws applicable to the Project. The Vendor shall prepare a chapter in the ESR outlining any municipal, provincial, federal, or other approvals or permits that may be required. Requirements may include but are not limited to:

i. Provincial Approvals and Agreements

Metrolinx MOECC Ministry of Natural Resources and Forestry (MNRF) MTCS MTO Local Utilities Compliance with Provincial Plans and Policies

ii. Federal Approvals and Agreements

Canadian Transportation Agency Species at Risk Act – Environment Canada and Department of Fisheries and Oceans

(DFO) Fisheries Act – DFO Migratory Birds Convention Act – Environment Canada Other Potential Responsible Authorities

iii. Municipal Approvals and Agreements for City of Markham, and Regional Municipality of

York

iv. Other potential authorities Technical Memo No. 2 will be prepared to document the analyses completed and outcome arising from the completion of Tasks 7 to 13, which include but are not limited to:

A detailed inventory of existing conditions Identification and development of the alternative design concepts; Evaluation criteria; A description of the evaluation methodology; The evaluation of alternative design concepts; Evaluation Criteria for evaluating of alternative design concept Identification of mitigating measures, and the impact study. Watermain, Sanitary, and Storm Servicing Report; and Implementation and Construction Phasing Plan

The Vendor will allocate sufficient time for the TAC to review and comment on Technical Memo No. 2.

35 of 112

Viewing Copy

Task 14- Functional Design

Building upon investigation works completed from Tasks 1 to 13, the Vendor shall complete a functional design for the preferred alternative design concept. The design shall be completed in accordance to the requirements set forth in Appendix A.1, A.3, and A.4.

In addition, this design shall be developed in consultation with the utility providers/public entities. The Vendor shall complete the functional design to the level of detail needed to include the following works:

An acceptable design and proposed construction techniques for temporary and permanent relocation/modification of interfering private utilities and public services;

An acceptable design of all impacted railway plant. All design solutions shall be developed in consultation with Metrolinx;

An acceptable design for all impacted Toronto water infrastructure to address watermain servicing, sanitary servicing and storm water conveyance;

Complete a preliminary streetscape design for the new roadway configuration including all impacted areas ( including plans and sections depicting location of streetcape area- with conceptual renderings); and,

Develop functional traffic staging & detour plans in consultation with Transportation Traffic Operations, Engineering and Construction Division, and Metrolinx,

All works completed as part of Task 14 shall be documented in the Functional Design Report – as noted in Appendix A.4.

Task 15 – Public and Stakeholder Consultation Public consultation is a key component of the Municipal Class EA process. The City of Toronto's Public Consultation Unit (PCU) will lead the public consultation component of this study. A comprehensive public and stakeholder consultation strategy will be developed and managed by the City of Toronto's Public Consultation Unit (PCU). The City of Toronto's Project Manager, Vendor and Project Team will review and provide input into the development of the plan. The plan will follow the prescribed Municipal Class EA process, including public notification, two public events and comment tracking. Stakeholder outreach will also be a part of this consultation process, which will include but not be limited to property owners, residents, and businesses. Additional engagement techniques such as a project web page, and key stakeholder meetings will be used. The PCU will undertake the following consultation activities, but not limited to:

development of key messages identification of communications tools (i.e. notification, newspaper advertisements, social media,

etc.) development and operation of a project web page on the City's website identification of key stakeholders and development of a City managed mailing list working with the City Project Manager to brief and coordinate with Councillors issuing letters to key stakeholders (Agencies, Aboriginal community contacts, etc.) facilitating interviews and meetings with key stakeholders public information centres (PIC) (2 events)

36 of 112

Viewing Copy

issues tracking and public consultation report writing

City staff will act as a one-window contact for the public. The City's project team will be responsible for responding to written, verbal, or media enquiries. City staff will lead and manage consultation with any Aboriginal communities that may have an interest in the project other than communities engaged through the Archaeological Assessment required under Task 3. The documented results of these efforts will be provided to the Vendor for inclusion in the Record of Consultation and to be summarized in the consultation summary section of the EA. City staff will directly arrange and pay for:

all costs associated with the printing and distribution of notices the placement of newspaper advertisements the booking of venues for public events facilitating public events

The Vendor will support the work of the City's Public Consultation Unit and provide technical support at all public and stakeholder meetings. This support is to include but not limited to:

preparation of display boards, drawings, presentations (i.e. Power Point)

preparation of handout materials and any other required communication materials, such as notices, advertisements and letters

attendance of relevant technical experts at all meetings to present technical issues and/or answer technical questions

presenting at Project/TAC/Stakeholder meetings and PICs

compiling minutes and meeting notes on issues raised at Project/TAC/Stakeholder meetings and PICs

reviewing and providing assistance in the preparation of PIC Summary Reports

supporting the preparation of responses to written, verbal or media enquiries

preparation of a summary of key issues raised and responses provided in the final study documentation

The ability of the Vendor team to prepare effective public information materials and to communicate with the public is critical. The Vendor must be able to present (verbally, in writing and using imagery) technical, economic and design related issues in a clear and effective manner. All materials prepared by the Vendor will be reviewed by the Project Team prior to being finalized for publication. Materials must be easy to read and understand for a lay person e.g. use of simple and plain language. Clear graphics and large fonts are recommended. To allow for sufficient review time and revision completion, all public information materials must be drafted at least five weeks prior to publication. This, and other review periods, should be reflected in the schedule submitted with the proposal. Production of public information materials will follow City guidelines, to be provided by PCU. Delivery of information materials production will follow a minimum schedule as follows:

7 weeks before public event - Proposed outline of key content

5 weeks before public event - Complete draft materials for City review

3 weeks before public event - Finalized materials delivered for City to publish online in order to correspond with public notification

2 weeks before public event - Public notice issued (City)

37 of 112

Viewing Copy

1 week before public event - Materials optimized for print/slides for City review

Day of Public Event - Materials printed and presented

Accessibility for Ontarians with Disabilities Act (AODA) must be complied with. All public information materials prepared by the Vendor, to be posted on the City's website, must conform with World Wide Web Consortium Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG) 2.0 Level A in accordance with the AODA Integrated Accessibility Standards. The Vendor must supply the web version of materials (panels, presentation, final reports) in 5 megabytes or smaller PFDs. The Vendor will organize, prepare agendas and all necessary materials, attend and minute all meetings of the Project Team and Technical Advisory Committee. The Vendor shall also prepare all necessary presentation materials, attend and minute all public meetings. Minutes are due no later than one week after the meeting. The actual number of meetings with staff and the project teams may change as required over the course of the study. For the purposes of budgeting, it is assumed the Vendor will participate in the following meetings as part of the study:

Weekly 30 minute update meetings by teleconference with the City's Project Lead; Twelve (12) meetings with City staff and the Project team, through the course of the study; Six (6) meetings with Technical Advisory Committee; Eight (8) meetings to support any property/easement acquisition required. The first set of

meetings (4) will occur before PIC#1 with potentially affected property owners for input. Property owner consultation will be grouped by option. The second set of meetings (4) will occur before PIC#2 to consult with affected property owners for the preferred solution.

Twelve (12) meetings with stakeholders and agencies (for example, City Staff, Metrolinx, TTC, City of Markham, and York Region, Ratepayers Associations, Community Groups);

Two (2) public information centre sessions. The initial meeting will introduce the study, existing conditions, constraints and opportunities, list of alternatives, evaluation criteria, evaluation and preliminary recommended solutions. The second meeting will consult on evaluation of alternative design concepts and recommended designs.

The above meetings are considered base cost and part of the scope of work. The Vendor is expected to plan and schedule the meetings appropriately within the study schedule. The Vendor will organize, prepare agendas and all necessary materials, attend and minute all meetings in which they participate. Minutes are due no later than one week after the meeting. If the Vendor determines that more meetings are required, it is expected that the Vendor will provide a rationale for the number of additional meetings and include such meetings in the base scope of the work and schedule when submitting the proposal. Task 16- Environmental Study Report (ESR) The Vendor will prepare a draft Environmental Study Report, compiling the contents of Technical Memos No. 1 and No. 2 plus the evaluation of alternatives, along with necessary contextual and linking material, correspondence, and technical appendices. Aside from the specific sections required as per the MCEA, the Report shall include but not limited the following elements:

An Executive Summary; Introduction and Background; Problem/Opportunity Statement; Rationale for the Undertaking; A description of the existing environmental conditions. A clear and concise description of the work undertaken, the alternative solutions

developed and evaluated, including a description of the evaluation criteria, indicators and

38 of 112

Viewing Copy

measures and the methodology used to compare alternative solutions and select a preferred alternative solution;

An assessment of the preferred alternative solution, including measures needed to mitigate the impact of the preferred solution;

A clear and concise description of the work undertaken, the alternative design concepts developed and evaluated, including a description of the evaluation criteria, indicators and measures and the methodology used to compare alternative design concepts and select a preferred alternative design concept;

An assessment of the preferred alternative design concept, including measures needed to mitigate the impact of the preferred concept;

A description of the undertaking; An Impact Assessment of the preferred alternative designs; A detailed cost estimate that must include environmental clean-up costs, capital costs,

operating costs, operation impact cost, property/expropriation costs, and utility relocation costs (if any), traffic detour and staging costs for the preferred design solutions, including design assumptions and unit costs;

Implementation and Construction Staging; A consultation summary outlining how consultation with government agencies, interested

persons and Aboriginal and Métis communities was carried out and describing the results of the consultation; A summary of other approvals that must be obtained prior to implementing the preferred solution;

All technical data collected and the results of various analyses, which shall be provided as appendices;

A detailed Record of Consultation, which shall be provided as an appendix to the ESR; Functional Design Report, which shall be provided as an appendix to the ESR and shall

include: Functional plans, profiles, property protection plans and any other required drawings at an appropriate scale; and commitments to further work;

Permits and Approvals; Monitoring; and Recommendation;

The draft Report will be reviewed with the project TAC and key stakeholders, who will provide written and verbal comments on the document. A draft final Report will be prepared, incorporating the TAC comments as appropriate. A tabulated response to all the TAC comments will be provided by the Vendor, documenting how the comments are addressed in the revised report, along with the rationale for disagreeing with or setting aside other input. Adequate time must be provided for all reviews. The draft final Environmental Study Report will be reviewed by the City Project Manager, in consultation with other staff as appropriate. Once any comments generated by this final review are addressed, the Vendor will print and provide to the City twenty (20) printed copies of the Final Report, along with five (5) digital copies (pdf). The printed copy must be in 8 ½" x 11" format, bound and printed on both sides of each page as appropriate. Foldouts and inserts may be used as necessary. While colour may be used, the document should be fully legible in a black and white copied version. Each CD must have a printed title and case. The Vendor will provide the City with a master digital copy (on CD) of the Environmental Study Report that will include single comprehensive MS Word and .pdf files of the whole report, along with a set of separate files of the same material, divided by Chapter and Appendix. The master copy will also include all CAD drawings of alternatives, in the City's preferred Microstation Version 8 format.

39 of 112

Viewing Copy

Task 17 - Project Management

The Vendor will be required to:

Work collaboratively with the City through the process and provide presentations and technical support as required;

Provide a project management structure for the consultant team to ensure that the work of the consultant(s), reflecting the various tasks identified, are coordinated and consistent with the overall project and completed in a timely manner;

Provide draft reports and other materials to the City's Project Manager for review and circulation to the TAC. A minimum of three (3) weeks (15 working days) to review draft reports/materials should be provided;

Attend project meetings, including initiation and progress meetings; and Ensure proper representation for meetings with the TAC, SAC and the community, in general.

The Vendor will organize, prepare agendas and all necessary materials, attend and minute all meetings of the Project Team and TAC. The agenda should be distributed at least five (5) days in advance of the meeting. Minutes are due no later than five (5) days after the meeting. The Vendor will be supported by a team of experts whereby primary expertise will be provided in the fields of traffic operations, traffic planning, travel demand forecasting and monitoring, structure and bridge design, rail design, drainage and road design, municipal services and utility engineering, environmental planning, land use planning, urban design, real estate evaluation, landscape architecture and archaeology. It is anticipated that the Study Design will more fully articulate the relationship of professionals assigned to this project from each of the relevant disciplines. The Vendor team must contain all the expertise necessary to analyze the full range of alternative concepts. 3.2 Roles and Responsibilities The Vendor

Roles and responsibilities of the Vendor shall include but are not limited to the following:

In addition to the key tasks listed in 3.0, the Vendor is expected to provide progress reports at regular meetings with the City project team;

Organize, prepare and circulate agendas and all necessary materials, attend and make presentations at all meetings;

Produce all meeting minutes for meetings with City Staff, stakeholder/public consultation meetings within one (1) week of conclusion of meetings;

Provide drafts of parts of the technical memo and report for review for the City working group for the final comments and revisions;

Document all responses to individual staff comments in one document by date and comment in a concise and easy to read format. This master document will contain all staff/agency comments (and associated Vendor responses), will be updated and submitted to Project Manager weekly and will reference, by section and page, where each approved comment has been incorporated within all Technical Memo's and the Final Report.

Manage time and budget to ensure the timely delivery of the full final report. The work schedule and budget status should be presented at regular meeting with the City Project Manager.

No out of scope additional work beyond that authorized by this RFP and any contractual agreement with the City will be pursued without the express authorization of the Project Manager.

40 of 112

Viewing Copy

City of Toronto

The roles and responsibilities of the City shall include but are not limited to the following:

Staff of the Infrastructure Planning Unit will manage the project for the Transportation Services Division and will be responsible for overseeing the planning, design, and contractual aspects of this study;

The City will provide background information and mapping for the duration of the project;

Monitoring of the Vendor's work;

Provide final approval of the status of materials/reports, public presentation materials;

Release of any communication materials (print or electronic) related to the project;

Arrange for meeting locations at Toronto City Hall, City of Markham or York Region for study meetings;

Correspond directly with all government review agencies and members of the public with technical input from the Vendor;

Act as the main point of contact for all information requests on the project from internal/external stakeholders and the media;

Carry out consultation with Aboriginals and Métis communities in accordance with the City of Toronto Aboriginal Consultation Protocol for Environmental Assessments; and,

Arrange and pay for: o all costs associated with the printing and distribution of flyers; and, o the placement of newspaper advertisements.

The City of Toronto, in collaboration with City of Markham, York Region and Metrolinx as appropriate, will provide to the proponents: Steeles Avenue East / CN Rail Grade Separation Environmental Study Report (May 1994) – Provided

upon request. Steeles Avenue East / CN Rail Grade Separation Environmental Study Report, City Council Decision

and staff report ( August 2002) – http://www.toronto.ca/legdocs/2002/agendas/council/cc020730/wks9rpt/cl009.pdf

Steeles Avenue East / GO Transit Railway Grade Separation Environmental Study Report Addendum (October 2004) – Provided upon request Steeles Avenue East/GO Transit Railway Grade Separation Class Environmental Assessment Study Addendum Staff Report (November 19, 2004) – http://www.toronto.ca/legdocs/2004/agendas/committees/wks/wks041208/it009.pdf

Minutes of the Works Committee Meeting, dated December 8, 2004 (see Item 14.9) – http://www.toronto.ca/legdocs/2004/minutes/committees/wks/wks041208.pdf

Redlea Avenue/Silver Star Boulevard Environmental Study Report (October 2007) – Provided upon request. Metrolinx Stouffville Expansion EA – http://www.gotransit.com/public/en/improve/environmentalassessments.aspx

TTC McNicoll Bus Garage EA - https://ttc.ca/About_the_TTC/Projects/McNicoll_Bus_Garage/index.jsp

Accessibility Design Guidelines (2004) – http://www.toronto.ca/diversity/pdf/accessibility_design_guidelines.pdf

Vibrant Streets – Toronto’s Coordinated Street Furniture Program (September 2008) – http://www.toronto.ca/involved/projects/streetfurniture/pdf/vibrant_streets.pdf

Toronto’s Inventory of Heritage Properties – http://www1.toronto.ca/wps/portal/contentonly?vgnextoid=cfc20621f3161410VgnVCM10000071d60f89RCRD&vgnextchannel=104752cc66061410VgnVCM10000071d60f89RCRD

Toronto’s Official Plan – http://www.toronto.ca/planning/official_plan/introduction.htm

41 of 112

Viewing Copy

Toronto Bike Plan –

http://www.toronto.ca/cycling/bikeplan/index.htm Toronto Pedestrian Charter –

http://www.toronto.ca/transportation/walking/charter.htm Toronto Walking Strategy –

http://www.toronto.ca/transportation/walking/walking_strategy.htm Wet Weather Flow Master Plan –

http://www.toronto.ca/water/protecting_quality/wwfmmp/ Please contact Anson Yuen at 416-338-0667 to set up an appointment to review the above material. The City of Toronto, in collaboration with City of Markham, York Region and Metrolinx as appropriate, will provide to the successful vendor:

City CADD and Survey specifications for digital drawings; Base mapping of the study area for the parameters as described in the Study Area; Available land survey data; Available Turning Movement Counts as described in Section 3; Available existing geotechnical soil report; Available As-built Drawings; Available Collision Data of the study focus area; Available Toronto Water Asset information as described in Section 3.1 Task 8; Information on recently approved developments, development applications and related

documents as it relates to study; Information on developments applications currently under review by the City of Toronto and

the City of Markham: Metrolinx: Available information on the proposed rail corridor expansion along the Stouffville GO Rail Corridor at Steeles Avenue East, including proposed improvements to the Milliken Station (i.e. Available Base Mapping, Survey and SUE, Geotech Reports, Design Drawings)

City of Markham: Available information regarding the Milliken Secondary Plan and Midland North Extension

City of Markham: Utility Asset Information The City of Toronto operates under the following Projection, Datum and CADD specifications:

(a) horizontal coordinates are based on the North American Datum of 1927 (1974 adjustment) (NAD27-74), projected to the 3 degree Ontario Coordinate System also referred to as Modified Transverse Mercator (MTM), in zone 10, central meridian 79 degrees 30 minutes west longitude

(b) elevations derived from the Canadian Geodetic Vertical Datum of 1928 (CGVD28)

(c) CADD Format: Microstation V8 – DGN

The City of Toronto will provide base mapping of the study area in DGN format. For the purpose of CADD drafting and functional design, the Vendor shall operate in DGN format. The City also operates in GIS Format - ESRIShapefile (accessible using ESRI ArcGIS 10+). Supplementary information may be provided in Shapefile or other geospatial formats where available.

42 of 112

Viewing Copy

York Region and City of Markham operates under the following Projection, Datum and CADD specifications: Horizontal coordinates are based on:

Datum: NAD83 (Original)

Projection: Universal Transverse Mercator (UTM) (6 degree), zone 17, central meridian 81 degrees west longitude

Elevations are not derived from any recognized national datum Format: GIS ArcMap Metrolinx operates under the following Projection, Datum and CADD specifications:

In accordance with the MTO's Engineering Survey Manual dated October 2006, Metrolinx uses the following Datums and Grid System (AutoCAD 2012):

Map Projection: 3-degree Modified Transverse Mercator (MTM).

MTM Zone 10

Horizontal Reference Datum: North American Datum (NAD) 1983, using the NAD83 Canadian Spatial Reference System (CSRS) adjustment

Horizontal Datum / Ellipsoid: NAD83 CSRS v.6 (epoch 2010.0) / GRS80

Vertical Reference Datum: Canadian Geodetic Vertical Datum (CGVD) 1928

Orthometric Elevation: CGVD1928:78 Adjustment

For CADD drafting and design, the Vendor shall convert all data provided by York Region, City of Markham, and Metrolinx to Microstation V8 format and to the City's Datum and Coordinate System (above) before use. If conversions are not possible via mathematical conversion for the projection or with the use of City of Toronto grid shift file for datum conversion, the Vendor shall incorporate elements including locations of utilities and infrastructure (for horizontal and vertical alignment): 1) based on available as-built drawings as part of the SUE C and D exercises conducted by the Vendor, 2) based on investigations (toning or non-toning methodologies as a part of the SUE B exercise provided by the City and 3) based on gathering common reference points ( to adjust the Horizontal and Vertical Datum to adhere to the City of Toronto system standard ) as part of the Engineering Survey exercise provided by the City.

The City of Toronto will provide the following support:

Provide available grid shift file

Provide City of Toronto Horizontal and Vertical control information and common reference points upon request by the Vendor.

43 of 112

Viewing Copy

4.0 PROPOSAL EVALUATION AND SELECTION PROCESS 4.1 Selection Committee All Proposals will be evaluated through a comprehensive review and analysis by a Selection Committee, which will include members from City of Toronto Transportation Services, City Planning, and Engineering and Construction Services as well as from York Region and Metrolinx. The Selection Committee may at its sole discretion retain additional committee members or advisors. The aim of the Selection Committee will be to select one Proposal which, in its opinion, meets the City's requirements under this RFP and provides the best overall value to the each municipality and Metrolinx, but the Proposal selected, if any, will not necessarily be the one offering the lowest fees or cost. Pricing is one of the components in determining the total score or ranking. By responding to this RFP, Proponents will be deemed to have agreed that the decision of the Selection Committee will be final and binding. 4.2 Selection Criteria The Selection Committee shall review, analyze and score the Proposals in accordance with the Proposal Evaluation Form in Appendix E. 4.3 Selection Process The Selection Committee will score the Proposals using the evaluation table in Appendix E. If the submission fails any mandatory requirements, the Proposal will be rejected. Stage 1 – Mandatory Submission Requirements Proposals will be reviewed to assess compliance with the mandatory requirements. Proposals failing to comply with these requirements will be rejected. Proponents must submit their Proposals in accordance with Section 5.2 including mandatory forms and mandatory technical submission requirements (Section 5.3, Subsection 3). This Stage is evaluated on a pass/fail system. If the submissions fail any mandatory submission requirements, the Proposal will be rejected. Stage 2 – Technical portion of the Proposal Evaluation The City will create a Stage 2 list of Proponents who have achieved a "PASS" from Stage 1 – Mandatory Submission Requirements. The Selection Committee will score the Proposals using the evaluation table in Appendix E. The detailed technical portion of the Proposal evaluation will be based on multiple criteria as listed in Appendix E – Proposal Evaluation Table. In Stage 2, the Selection Committee will evaluate Proposals for technical merit and presentation. The technical component will be scored out of 80 marks. Stage 3 – Interview/Presentation and/or reference checks (if required) A short list of up to five (5) top-scoring Proponents from Stage 2 may be selected and the City may validate written Proposals as follows:

44 of 112

Viewing Copy

• Detailed reference checks, relevant technical qualifications and experiences of Proponents on projects of similar size, scope, and complexity; and • An interview with the short list of Proponents. Proponents will be requested to answer questions to clarify and/or validate their understanding of the requirements. The Selection Committee will use interview and/or reference check results to revise, refine, and finalize the score for the Technical Evaluation portion of the Proposal. Stage 4 – Cost of Services A Proponent’s technical portion of the Proposal (from Stages 2 and 3, if applicable) must score a minimum of 75% (or 60 of 80 points) for the Cost of Services reviewed and evaluated. Proponents' fees are calculated as follows: the lowest cost Proposal receives 20 points, and the remaining Proposals are assigned points based on the following formula: (cost of lowest price Proposal divided by the price of the next Proposal) x 20. A Total Score will only be calculated for Proposals that have advanced to Stage 4. The Total Score will be the sum of the Technical Evaluation score and the Cost of Services score. The proposal that achieves the highest Total Score will be ranked first. In the event of a tie Total Score, the Proponent achieving the highest score for its Technical Proposal will be ranked first overall. 4.4 Schedule of Events

Event Date Release of RFP August 5, 2015 Deadline for Proponent Questions August 12, 2015 Release of Final Addendum, if any August 2, 2015 Deadline for Submission of Proposal August 26, 2015 Date Evaluation Expected to be completed Week of September 7, 2015 Selection of Preferred Proponent Week of September 7, 2015 Approval and Award Date Week of September 7, 2015 Contract Start Date Week of September 7, 2015

This schedule is subject to change and appropriate written notice of any changes will be provided where feasible.

4.5 Clarifications As part of the evaluation process, the Selection Committee may make requests for further information with respect to the content of any Proposal in order to clarify its understanding of the Proponent’s response. The clarification process shall not be used to obtain required information that was not submitted at time of close or to promote a particular Proponent. The Selection Committee may request this further information from one or more Proponents and not from others. 4.6 Interviews or Demonstrations A Proponent whose written Proposal has received a high ranking may be invited to an interview with the Selection Committee, the results of which will be used by the Committee as a mechanism to revisit,

45 of 112

Viewing Copy

revise, confirm and finalize the score and select the recommended Proponent(s). The City reserves the right to interview up to a maximum of five (5) top ranked Proponents. The Selection Committee may interview any Proponent(s) without interviewing others, and the City will be under no obligation to advise those not receiving an invitation until completion of the evaluation and selection process. The representatives of a Proponent designated by the Selection Committee in its invitation to the Proponent must attend any interview scheduled as part of this evaluation process unless the City agrees otherwise in writing at its sole discretion. The representative of a Proponent at any interview scheduled is expected to be thoroughly versed and knowledgeable with respect to the requirements of this RFP and the contents of its Proposal, and must have the authority to make decisions and commitments with respect to matters discussed at the interview, which may be included in any resulting Agreement. Where the staff team proposed by the Proponent is an important element in the selection criteria, the staff team proposed shall be present for the interviews. No Proponent will be entitled to be present during, or otherwise receive, any information regarding any interview with any other Proponent. Refusal of a Proponent to participate in an interview/demonstration requested by the City may, in the City's sole discretion, be considered a failure of the Proponent to comply with a Mandatory Requirement of the RFP and thus subject to disqualification. 4.7 Proposal Evaluation Results Upon conclusion of the evaluation process, a final recommendation will be made by the Selection Committee to the appropriate City staff member and/or City Council. Proposal evaluation results shall be the property of the City and are subject to MFIPPA. Evaluation results may be subject to public release pursuant to MFIPPA. Proponents should be aware that Council and individual Councillors have the right to view the Proposals provided that their requests have been made in accordance with the City’s procedure. 4.8 Negotiations and Agreement The award of any Agreement will be at the absolute discretion of the City. The selection of a recommended Proponent will not oblige the City to negotiate or execute an Agreement with that recommended Proponent. Any award of an Agreement resulting from this RFP will be in accordance with the bylaws, policies and procedures of the City. The City shall have the right to negotiate on such matter(s) as it chooses with the recommended Proponent without obligation to communicate, negotiate, or review similar modifications with other Proponents. The City shall incur no liability to any other Proponent as a result of such negotiation or alternative arrangements. During negotiations, the scope of the services may be refined, issues may be prioritized, responsibilities among the Proponent, all staff and sub-consultants provided by it and the City may be settled and the issues concerning implementation may be clarified.

46 of 112

Viewing Copy

Any Agreement must contain terms and conditions in the interests of the City and be in a form satisfactory to the City Solicitor. If the Agreement requires City Council approval, then the final Agreement must contain terms and conditions substantially as set out in the Council report authorizing the Agreement. Any Agreement will incorporate as schedules or appendices such part of the RFP (including addenda) and the Proposal submitted in response thereto as are relevant to the provision of the goods and/or services. The terms and conditions set out in Appendix ‘B’ shall be incorporated in any Agreement entered into with the recommended Proponent. These terms and conditions are mandatory and are not negotiable. Any Proponent wishing to request that the City consider any changes to the terms and conditions set out in Appendix "B" must follow the process outlined in section 5 of Appendix "A". If any Agreement cannot be negotiated within thirty (30) business days of notification to the recommended Proponent, the City may, at its sole discretion, terminate negotiations with that Proponent and negotiate an Agreement with another Proponent or abort the RFP process and not enter into any Agreement with any of the Proponents. 5.0 PROPOSAL SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS 5.1 General Overview The City has formulated the procedures set out in this RFP to ensure that it receives Proposals through an open, competitive process, and that Proponents receive fair and equitable treatment in the solicitation, receipt and evaluation of their Proposals. The City may reject the Proposal of any Proponent who fails to comply with any such procedures. Proposals are expected to address the RFP content requirements as outlined herein, and should be well ordered, detailed and comprehensive. Clarity of language, adherence to suggested structuring, and adequate accessible documentation is essential to the City’s ability to conduct a thorough evaluation. The City is interested in Proposals that demonstrate efficiency and value for money. General marketing and promotional material will not be reviewed or considered. The City prefers that the assumptions used by a Proponent in preparing its Proposal are kept at a minimum and to the extent possible, that Proponents will ask for clarification prior to the deadline for Proponent questions rather than make assumptions. Proponents should also review sections 3 to 6 of Appendix A with respect to asking questions about the RFP. Where a Proponent's assumptions are inconsistent with information provided in the RFP, or so extensive that the total Proposal cost is qualified, such Proponent risks disqualification by the City in the City's sole discretion. 5.2 Proposal Documentation and Delivery The documentation for each Proposal:

a) Must be submitted in a sealed envelope or container (submissions made by fax, telephone, electronic message or telegram will not be accepted) displaying a full and correct return address.

b) Should be limited to preferably ten (10) pages, double sided (for a total of 20 pages), minimum 11 point font, with unlimited appendices.

c) All CVs and Proponent information should be included as appendices and not within the main body of the proposal.

d) Must consist of one (1) original (clearly marked as such on its first page) and preferably five (5) full photocopies of:

(i) A Main Proposal Document as described in the section below titled Proposal Content, including all attachments and appendices as required. (Mandatory)

47 of 112

Viewing Copy

(ii) Form 1 (Proposal Submission Form) completed and signed by an authorized official of

the Proponent. This includes the acknowledgement of all addenda received as per Appendix A, item 4. (Mandatory)

(iii) Form 2 (Policy to Exclude Bids from External Parties involved in the Preparation or Development of a Specific Call/Request) completed as indicated (Mandatory)

(iv) Form 3 (Restrictions on the Hiring and use of Former City of Toronto Management Employees for City Contracts) completed as indicated, if applicable.

(v) Form 4 (Environmentally Responsible Procurement Statement) completed as indicated, if applicable.

(vi) Appendix D (Price Detail Form) completed as indicated. (Mandatory) (vii) Appendix F (Project Experience Form) completed as indicated ( Mandatory) Note: Forms 1 to 4 are provided in Appendix C.

e) Should consist of one (1) original Form 6 (Declaration of Non-Discrimination Policy)

completed and submitted as indicated on the form, if applicable. Note: Form 6 is provided in Appendix C;

f) Must be completed in a non-erasable medium and signed in ink; g) Must not include: i) any qualifying or restricting statements;

ii) exceptions to the terms and conditions of the RFP that have not be approved through an addendum; or

iii) additional terms or conditions. h) Must be delivered no later than the Closing Deadline to:

Chief Purchasing Official Purchasing and Materials Management Division 18th Floor, West Tower, City Hall Toronto, ON, M5H 2N2

Delays caused by any delivery service (including Canada Post and courier) shall not be grounds for any extension of the Deadline, and Proposals that arrive after the Deadline will not be accepted.

5.3 Proposal Content The Proposal should contain the following items: Letter of Introduction – Introducing the Proponent and signed by the person(s) authorized to sign on behalf of and to bind the Proponent to statements made in response to this RFP. This should contain the same signature as the person signing the submission forms. Table of Contents – Include page numbers and identify all included materials in the Proposal submission. Subsection 1 – Executive Summary The Proponents should be requested to provide a summary of the key features of the Proposal.

48 of 112

Viewing Copy

Subsection 2 – Proponent Profile Proponents should have the staff, organization, and financial resources to ensure their ability to deliver and support the proposed project. 1. To permit the Proponent to be evaluated fully as a viable and sound enterprise, include the

following information with respect to the Proponent, and if applicable, for each consortium member.

(a) A profile and summary of corporate history including:

date company started; products and/or services offered; total number of employees; major clients; and business partners and the products/services they offer;

(b) A profile and summary of corporate history of any parents or subsidiaries and

affiliates and the nature of the Proponent’s relationship to them (i.e., research, financing and so on).

2. If the Proponent is a member of a consortium, provide a description of the relationship(s) between consortium members. Please note section 2 of Appendix A regarding consortiums and the requirement that there be a single Proponent.

Subsection 3 - Mandatory Experience Requirements for Bridge Projects Proponents must have carried out the Municipal Class EA assessments and equivalent of three (3) rail bridge projects within province of Ontario within the past ten (10) years in order to be considered for the award. Furthermore, at least one project must have been performed on a rail bridge spanning an urban arterial road and had a construction value commensurate with the anticipated construction value of the project for which the firm is considering to submit a proposal. The Proponent must list the projects fulfilling these requirements using the form provided in Appendix F. Subsection 4 – Experience and Qualifications of the Proponent It is important that the Work be undertaken by a Proponent who can demonstrate specific knowledge of, and experience in performing similar work for projects of comparable nature, size and scope. Proponents should provide a minimum of three (3) references for the purpose of evaluating the Proponent’s experience and track record of success. Note that the City prefers references for solutions that are similar to those being considered in response to this RFP and these references should verify the experience of the Proposed Project Team and Project Lead in the Proponent’s Proposal. For example, solutions for the municipal/public sector, using the same or similar products proposed, projects of similar size, scale and complexity. Each reference should include:

the identity of the reference client organization; a contact name and title, address and telephone number; the size and nature of the client’s business; the number of years dealing with the client; a description of the project; the timing and duration of the Proponent’s involvement in the project;

49 of 112

Viewing Copy

the services that were provided by the Proponent; date of the project; details regarding the scale of the project; and client’s URL address.

Please note that where the skills/expertise/experience are being provided by a subcontractor or other legal entity apart from the Proponent, a Proposal that does not include the information requested in this Subsection 3 for each such subcontractor or other entity will not be awarded full marks during the evaluation process. In providing references, Proponents agree that the City can contact the individuals provided as part of the evaluation process. The City will make its own arrangements in contacting the references. Substitution of references will not be permitted after the close of the RFP. Project Lead The qualifications, experience, public consultation/ communication skills and time commitment of the Project Lead will be significant considerations in the evaluation of the Proposal. The City looking for a Project Lead with demonstrated experience in coordinating and leading multidisciplinary teams and having relevant experience in urban transportation projects and a familiarity with the Municipal Class EA process. The Proposal should include details on three (3) of the most recent projects overseen by the Project Lead. Be sure to include each client’s name plus a phone number for the appropriate contact. Please also indicate in the Technical Proposal the number of days the Project Lead has committed to this project. It is recognized that the Project Lead may have a person or persons assisting them on a day to day basis, in the function of "Deputy Project Lead" or "Assistant Project Manager". The role, experience, and qualifications of the person(s) so designated is critical to the City's understanding of the Project Lead's effectiveness and should therefore be expanded on in the Proposal. Both the Project Lead and the "Deputy" (if applicable) will be assessed together in the "Proponent and Project Lead" evaluation factor. The Proponent's Project lead and Deputy Project Lead (if applicable) should state the time commitment ( in hours) to complete the requirements as stated in this RFP. Continuity of key personnel such as the Project Lead is paramount, with a contractual obligation for substitutions only with full written approval of the City. The City retains the right to refuse a reassignment of the Proponent's Project Lead. Subsection 5 – Proposed Staff Team and Resources It is important that the work be undertaken by a team who can demonstrate specific knowledge of, and experience in performing similar work for projects of comparable nature, size and scope. In particular, the Proponent should provide the following in its Proposal: a) A list of key staff and any sub-consultants or services you would propose to use for this work

together with their professional qualifications, related project experience and an indication of their duties and responsibilities on this particular project.

50 of 112

Viewing Copy

b) An organizational chart should be provided showing team members’ responsibilities (sub-

consultants should be included on this chart). The roles and responsibilities of the Project Manager and other key team members should be described in the main document. Proposed project staffing over the assignment period should include numbers by “classification” for key staff as well as other staff.

c) Resumes for proposed individuals are to be included as an Appendix to the Proposal. It is

important that key project individuals (i.e. major areas of responsibility) be named, with accompanying indication of guaranteed availability. Continuity of key personnel will be required, with a contractual obligation for substitutions only with full written approval of the City. Also, state assumptions regarding roles and involvement of City of Toronto staff.

d) An outline of the roles of junior and/or support staff contributing to the assignment, including

a realistic portrayal of the reliance of key staff on support staff within their areas of responsibility; and

e) Include strategies and individuals that can fulfill the roles and responsibilities for any

unforeseen events requiring replacement of team members.

The Proponent’s team should have a sound knowledge of engineering: road, rail and structural design, utilities, drainage and stormwater management; archeology; heritage; urban planning and urban design; and the Environmental Assessment process. Note: The Proponent should submit signed consent forms authorizing the disclosure of personal information to the City, or its designated agent(s), for any resumes that are submitted; however, the Proponent will accept all liability if signed consent forms and resumes are not disclosed to the City. It is important that key project individuals (i.e. major areas of responsibility) be named, with accompanying indication of guaranteed availability. Continuity of key personnel will be required, with a contractual obligation for substitutions only with full written approval of the City. Subsection 6 – Work plan and Deliverables The Proponent is requested to identify the project schedule and budget in their Proposal submission. The submission is requested to include a work program that explains all of the activities which will be undertaken in the project, including a description of the study deliverables which will include, at a minimum, those identified under RFP Section 3. The submission should also include a concise hourly rate breakdown for the key individuals assigned to each deliverable/task. The Proponent should identify any additional work/services that they believe is required for this study. The Proponent should also identify any such additional work/services in their Proposal which may be considered as a Value Added item which may include innovative approaches/insights and the identification of possible issues. Any additional information, including other/current traffic counts, origin/destination surveys, site visits and observations required to realistically represent the existing operating conditions and complete the traffic analysis, should be collected by the Proponent. If the Proponent concludes the

51 of 112

Viewing Copy

existing information provided to be insufficient to accurately represent the traffic conditions within the project focus area, the Proponent shall clearly identify in the proposal the additional background information required. The Proponent should confirm the data analysis requirements in the Proposal, including the rationale for selecting specific techniques and any additional requirements to those listed in Section 3. It is important that the project is started and completed in an efficient, timely and effective manner. The Proponent is requested to provide:

1. Proposed staffing over the assignment period 2. Clear statement of deliverables 3. Assumptions regarding roles and involvement of City staff 4. Methodology for working with various stakeholders / agencies 5. Methodology of developing and analyzing options 6. Recognition and understanding of key technical issues 7. Ability and willingness to propose and assess innovative solutions to the identified

problem(s) Subsection 7 – Project Schedule The project schedule should pick up and mirror most elements of the work plan and deliverables for ease of comparison. It is anticipated that the project should be completed within twelve (12) months. A detailed schedule indicating an estimated overall timeline of the project, including an indication of how soon you could commence work, should be included in the Proposal. The work schedule should indicate start and end dates for major activities and sub-activities, time commitments and constraints of key staff by activity, milestone dates for deliverables and approximate meeting dates. The project schedule should be included in the technical portion of the Proposal and must not include any pricing. This should be provided in a Gantt Chart format. Include 2-week time periods for all reviews. Subsection 8 – Cost of Services Notes to Pricing: In the event of mathematical errors found in the pricing pages, the unit prices quoted shall prevail. Extensions and totals will be corrected accordingly by City staff and adjustments resulting from the correction will be applied to the Total Lump Sum Price quoted. Prices submitted in a Proposal are to be firm for the duration of the RFP process and the term of any resulting Agreement. All prices must be stated in Canadian currency. The Proponent shall assume all currency risk. The City shall not be responsible for any additional costs. The Proponent shall be solely responsible for all costs including but not limited to, wages, salaries, statutory deductions and any other expenses and liabilities related to its own personnel, and subcontractors and suppliers and their respective personnel.

52 of 112

Viewing Copy

The Proponent shall be solely responsible for any and all payments and/or deductions required to be made including, but not limited to, those required for the Canada Pension Plan, Employment Insurance, Workplace Safety and Insurance, and Income Tax. All invoices must clearly show HST as a separate value and HST "registrant" number. Without restricting the generality of the foregoing, the Proponent acknowledges that, if it is a non-resident person, payments to the Proponent, as a non-resident person, may be subject to withholding taxes under the Income Tax Act (Canada). Further, unless the Proponent, as a non-resident person, provides the City with an official letter from Canada Revenue Agency waiving the withholding requirements, the City will withhold the taxes it determines are required under the Income Tax Act (Canada). A. Core Pricing 1. The Proponent must complete and submit the Price Detail Forms located in Appendix D –

Supplementary Submission Forms. 2. The Total Lump Sum Price (Appendix D - Table 1) quoted must include all labour, profit,

other overhead, materials, equipment, analysis, travel and accommodations, communication and telecommunications charges, transportation and delivery costs (courier, long distance charges, and so on), staff time, City/Vendor meetings (as and where deemed required by the City), disbursements and any/all other operational costs and fees associated with the Services. The City shall not be responsible for any additional costs.

3. The Proponent must provide a breakdown by task (Appendix D – Table 2) of the Total Fees

proposed in the Price Detail Form, Appendix D – Table 1. 4. The Proponent must submit a schedule of proposed hourly (Appendix D – Table 3) for all

project personnel by classification. All key personnel and any other specified individuals should be cross-referenced in Proposal Section 4 – Proposed Staff Team and Resources to these rated classifications. These rates, once approved, will be used for any part of the work to be paid for on a time basis as indicated elsewhere herein.

5. A Fee estimate should be provided for each Major Activity and each sub-activity as identified

in the Project Schedule, using the hourly and per diem rates identified above. The Project Schedule must specify the number of hours for each team member for each Major and sub-activity.

6. A project Contingency Allowance of $40,000 (Appendix D – Table 1, line item 3) must be

shown separately and added to the Proponent’s fee estimate. The Contingency is intended to provide for unanticipated minor unspecified or out-of-scope tasks that aid in project completion; should the need for such work be identified by the Vendor or the City, a scope and cost estimate will be developed and agreed to. Payments from the Contingency Allowance will require prior approval of the City of Toronto Project Manager.

7. Provide a Lump Sum Limit for any and all anticipated disbursements (Appendix D – Table 1,

line item 2) required in connection with the work with the following conditions: Disbursements will be paid at cost;

Automobile travel cost will be paid on the same basis and at a rate not exceeding the current meterage costs paid to City employees (52 cents per kilometer);

Roadway tolls are not chargeable;

Meal allowances are not permitted; and

53 of 112

Viewing Copy

Use of personal computers (laptops) is not chargeable.

8. The cost of additional services identified/offered in the Proposal that were not identified in

the RFP should not be included in the Cost of Services/Price Detail Form and should be identified as an additional cost. However, should the City wish to undertake this work, the cost for this work shall be that identified in the Proponent’s Proposal. See item C. Optional and or Additional Pricing below.

9. With the exception of the Provisional item stated in Section 3.1 regarding Additional

geotechnical, soil chemical, and hydro-geological investigations, all scope of work requirements stated in this RFP shall be considered base cost scope of work.

10. Provisional costs for Additional geotechnical, soil chemical, and hydro-geological

investigations required in Section 3.1, will be evaluated as part of the proposal costs(Appendix D – Table 1, line item 6).

B. Taxes Harmonized Sale Tax (HST) is to be applied to the prices submitted as specified in the relevant sections of the call document or in the Price Schedule provided in the call. HST for the supply and delivery of materials/goods is to be shown as additional/separate line items on the Price Schedule and any subsequent invoices. C. Optional and/or Additional Pricing The Proponent must clearly indicate in its Proposal and on the Price Detail Form specific Services and products which are additional or optional and which are excluded from the Total Proposal Price for Services, i.e., Core Pricing. Include an hourly fee schedule for all levels of Proponent’s professional, managerial and clerical staff with respect to services not covered (e.g. customization services) and rates for disbursements. A detailed cost summary of exclusions along with justification for the need must be provided. D. Payment Terms and Discount Schedule Fees will be paid on a time basis at approved hourly or per diem rates to an Upset Limit for each deliverable to be provided by the successful Proponent. Disbursements will be paid at cost with supporting documentation provided as described in Section 8 – Cost of Services, Part G – Invoicing and Reporting Specification Requirements. Invoices should be submitted on a monthly basis, in a format acceptable to the City, and include at a minimum the information described in Section 8 – Cost of Services, Part G – Invoicing and Reporting Specification Requirements. Proponents should: 1. Propose payment terms for Core Pricing. The City’s standard payment terms are 60 days from the

54 of 112

Viewing Copy

receipt of the invoice. The final payment terms may be subject to further negotiation.

2. Propose any prompt payment discount terms. If all the correct billing information has been indicated on the invoice, and no acceptable discount for early payment has been offered, the City will endeavour to pay within the vendor's terms from the receipt date of the invoice in Corporate Accounts Payable Unit - Metro Hall, 55 John Street, 14th floor. Payment terms should be clearly indicated on the invoice including early payment terms. The City will consider offers of early payment discount terms. Discounts will only be taken when early payment discount terms are met from the receipt date of the invoice in the Corporate Accounts Payable unit. Note: Discount terms for early payment cannot be earlier than 15 days from the receipt date of the invoice by the City of Toronto, Accounting Services Division, and Corporate Accounts Payable unit. City of Toronto offers secure electronic deposit payments directly to your bank account through our “Direct Deposit” program. For more information and/or to enroll for this payment option, please email us at FASPDD@toronto.ca or contact our AP Customer Service Desk at APHelp@toronto.ca or 416-397-5235. To support an electronic payable environment, the City of Toronto Corporate Accounts Payable unit will accept electronic vendor invoices submitted via email at APinvoice@toronto.ca . Note: Electronic invoices submitted must be in a PDF format as an attachment. If you have any questions regarding this process, please contact our AP Customer Service Desk at APHelp@toronto.ca or 416-397-5235 E. City of Toronto - Invoice/Billing Requirements To help us pay you promptly, it is essential that all required billing information is provided on the invoice submitted to the City of Toronto. Any missing billing information on an invoice will result in a payment delay and the invoice may be returned to you without payment. 1) All original vendor invoices must be addressed and be sent DIRECTLY to: City of Toronto Accounting Services Division Corporate Accounts Payable 55 John Street 14 Floor, Metro Hall Toronto, ON M5V 3C6 2) Invoice/s submitted to the City of Toronto must have complete ship to information including:

I. Name of City Division, II. The City Division’s contact name and phone number (the person ordering or picking up

the goods and/or services), III. Delivery location of goods and/or services (excluding pick-up order), IV. Purchasing document information on the invoice (blanket contract number, contract

release order number (CRO) purchase order (PO) or Divisional Purchase Order (DPO) must be clearly indicated on the invoice. (*This purchasing number should be provided by City staff at the time of order*)

55 of 112

Viewing Copy

Invoices that do not contain the required billing information may be returned without payment to the vendor for correction. F. Invoice Exceptions The above standard billing requirement for invoices must be followed excluding exceptions for vendor invoices related to approved capital projects subject to construction lien holdbacks. Billing requirement direction will be provided by the contract custodian or city divisional designate. For any further vendor invoicing information, please contact Corporate Accounts Payable at APHelp@toronto.ca or 416-397-5235. G. Invoicing and Reporting Specification Requirements Invoices throughout the project must be submitted in a format acceptable to the City. Each invoice is to include as a minimum the following information:

Invoice Summary The invoice summary sheet must be broken down into tasks and associated disbursements per the Fee Proposal. In addition, the summary sheet shall also show the following for each task: the task contract value, the amount billed for the billing period, the amount billed previously, the total to date, the per cent complete and the balance of fees remaining. The individual task information must be summarized for the entire contract. The Approved Change Order Amount, Total Invoice Amount, Amount Previous Payment, Holdbacks, HST and Total Amount Payable are to be identified separately. Charges against the contingency allowance provided for by the City will not be permitted without prior written approval. The contingency allowance should not be included in the calculation of the remaining budget on each invoice summary. Invoice Supporting Documentation For tasks billed on time based services to an Upset Limit, the invoice must include backup information identifying the hours charged to each task by each staff, and the corresponding hourly rate and classification. Billing rates for staff or classifications must be consistent with those provided in the Fee Proposal. Billing rate for staff or classifications other than those identified in the Fee Proposal shall be submitted in writing for review and shall be subject to approval prior to the utilization of the personnel on the assignment. Disbursements All disbursements shall be paid at cost unless specifically indicated otherwise. Allowable disbursements will be paid at cost subject to detailed expense sheets, copies of receipts, vehicle travel records, and all such documentation and materials needed in respect to such valid expenses to be provided as back up to the invoice.

56 of 112

Viewing Copy

Status Reporting With each invoice, provide a status report for the work completed for the billing period. Identify in the status report the overall project status, as well as a brief description of the work completed for each task and the work planned for the next billable period.

Section 9 – Cost Control 1. Submit a proposed methodology for Proponent’s resource planning, cost estimation, cost budgeting,

and cost control measures. The Proponent should clearly demonstrate the cost control measures that it will implement to ensure that the Lump Sum or Upset Limit for the Services will not be exceeded.

57 of 112

Viewing Copy

APPENDICES

APPENDIX A

RFP PROCESS TERMS AND CONDITIONS

1. Proponent’s Responsibility ............................................................................................... 59 2. Prime Proponent ............................................................................................................... 59 3. City Contacts and Questions ............................................................................................. 59 4. Addenda ............................................................................................................................ 60 5. Exceptions to Mandatory Requirements, Terms and Conditions...................................... 60 6. Omissions, Discrepancies and Interpretations .................................................................. 60 7. Incurred Costs ................................................................................................................... 60 8. Post-Submission Adjustments and Withdrawal of Proposals ........................................... 60 9. No Collusion ..................................................................................................................... 61 10. Prohibition Against Gratuities .......................................................................................... 61 11. Acceptance of Proposals ................................................................................................... 61 12. Verification ....................................................................................................................... 61 13. Unbalanced Bids ............................................................................................................... 61 14. Conflicts of Interest .......................................................................................................... 62 15. Ownership and Confidentiality of City-Provided Data ..................................................... 62 16. Ownership and Disclosure of Proposal Documentation ................................................... 62 17. Intellectual Property Rights .............................................................................................. 63 18. Failure or Default of Proponent ........................................................................................ 63 19. Quasi-Criminal/Criminal Activity of a Proponent ........................................................... 63 20. Publicity ............................................................................................................................ 63 21. Governing Law ................................................................................................................. 63

58 of 112

Viewing Copy

1. Proponent’s Responsibility

It shall be the responsibility of each Proponent: (a) to examine all the components of this RFP, including all appendices, forms and addenda; (b) to acquire a clear and comprehensive knowledge of the required services before submitting a

Proposal; (c) to become familiar, and (if it becomes a successful Proponent) comply, with all of the City’s

Policies and Legislation set out on the City of Toronto website at www.toronto.ca/tenders/index.htm

The failure of any Proponent to receive or examine any document, form, addendum, Agreement or policy shall not relieve the Proponent of any obligation with respect to its Proposal or any Agreement entered into or Purchase Order issued based on the Proponent’s Proposal.

2. Prime Proponent

A Proposal by a consortium of two or more entities may be submitted, but one person or company must be shown as the prime Proponent and be prepared to represent the consortium to the City by executing the Agreement, acting as the primary contact, and taking overall responsibility for performance of the Agreement.

Where a Proposal is made by a prime Proponent with associate firms working with or under the prime Proponent in either a sub-contracting or consortium relationship, it is required that those associate firms be named in the Proposal.

3. City Contacts and Questions

All contact and questions concerning this RFP should be directed in writing to the City employee(s) designated as “City Contact” in the Notice to Potential Proponents.

No City representative, whether an official, agent or employee, other than those identified “City Contacts” are authorized to speak for the City with respect to this RFP, and any Proponent who uses any information, clarification or interpretation from any other representative does so entirely at the Proponent’s own risk. Not only shall the City not be bound by any representation made by an unauthorized person, but any attempt by a Proponent to bypass the RFP process may be grounds for rejection of its Proposal.

From and after the date of this RFP until the time of any ensuing contract award, no communication with respect to this matter shall be made by any potential Proponent, or its representatives, including a third-party representative employed or retained by it (or any unpaid representatives acting on behalf of either), to promote its Proposal or oppose any competing Proposal, nor shall any potential Proponent, or its representatives, including a third party representative employed or retained by it (or any unpaid representatives acting on behalf of either), discuss the RFP or its Proposal with any City staff, City officials or Council member(s), other than a communication with the "City Contact" identified on page 1 on this RFP. Proponents should be aware that communications in relation to this RFP outside of those permitted by the applicable procurement policies and this RFP document contravene the Lobbying By-law, an offence for which a person is liable to a maximum fine of $25,000.00 on a first conviction and $100,000.00 on each subsequent conviction. In addition, the City's Procurement Processes Policy provides that any Proponent found in breach of the policy may be subject to disqualification from the call or a future call or calls at the discretion of Council. Notwithstanding anything to the contrary as set out in this document, the obligations as set out in the City of Toronto Municipal Code, Chapter 140 shall apply. For your information, please find below the links to the City's Procurement Processes Policy, Lobbying By-Law and Interpretive Bulletin on Lobbying and Procurement:

59 of 112

Viewing Copy

http://www.toronto.ca/citybusiness/pdf/policy_procurement_process.pdf http://www.toronto.ca/legdocs/municode/1184_140.pdf http://www.toronto.ca/lobbying/pdf/interpretation-bulleting_lobbying-procurements.pdf

4. Addenda

If it becomes necessary to revise any part of this RFP, the revisions will be by Addendum posted electronically in Adobe PDF format on the City’s website at www.toronto.ca/calldocuments. Proponents and prospective Proponents SHOULD MONITOR THAT SITE as frequently as they deem appropriate until the day of the Deadline. Only answers to issues of substance will be posted. The City reserves the right to revise this RFP up to the Closing Deadline. When an Addendum is issued the date for submitting Proposals may be revised by the City if, in its opinion, the City determines more time is necessary to enable Proponents to revise their Proposals. All Proponents must acknowledge receipt of all Addenda in the space provided on the Proposal Submission Form. The City’s Purchasing and Materials Management Division will make reasonable efforts to issue the final Addendum (if any) no later than two (2) days prior to the Deadline.

5. Exceptions to Mandatory Requirements, Terms and Conditions

If a Proponent wishes to suggest a change to any mandatory requirement, term or condition set forth in any part of this RFP, it should notify the City in writing not later than the deadline for questions. The Proponent must clearly identify any such requirement, term or condition, the proposed change and the reason for it. If the City wishes to accept the proposed change, the City will issue an Addendum as described in the article above titled Addenda. The decision of the City shall be final and binding, from which there is no appeal. Changes to mandatory requirements, terms and conditions that have not been accepted by the City by the issuance of an Addendum are not permitted and any Proposal that takes exception to or does not comply with the mandatory requirements, terms and conditions of this RFP will be rejected.

6. Omissions, Discrepancies and Interpretations

A Proponent who finds omissions, discrepancies, ambiguities or conflicts in any of the RFP documentation or who is in doubt as to the meaning of any part of the RFP should notify the City in writing not later than the deadline for questions. If the City considers that a correction, explanation or interpretation is necessary or desirable, the City will issue an Addendum as described in the article above titled Addenda. The decision and interpretation of the City shall be final and binding, from which there is no appeal. No oral explanation or interpretation shall modify any of the requirements or provisions of the RFP documents.

7. Incurred Costs

The City will not be liable for, nor reimburse, any potential Proponent or Proponent, as the case may be, for costs incurred in the preparation, submission or presentation of any Proposal, for interviews or any other activity that may be requested as part of the evaluation process or the process for the negotiation or execution of an Agreement with the City, as the case may be.

The rejection or non-acceptance of any or all Proposals shall not render the City liable for any costs or damages to any firm that submits a Proposal.

8. Post-Submission Adjustments and Withdrawal of Proposals

No unilateral adjustments by Proponents to submitted Proposals will be permitted.

A Proponent may withdraw its Proposal at any time prior to the Deadline by notifying the City Buyer designated in this RFP in writing on company letterhead or in person, with appropriate identification. Telephone and e-mail requests will not be considered.

60 of 112

Viewing Copy

A Proponent who has withdrawn a Proposal may submit a new Proposal, but only in accordance with the terms of this RFP.

After the Deadline each submitted Proposal shall be irrevocable and binding on Proponents for a period of 120 days.

If the City makes a request to a Proponent for clarification of its Proposal, the Proponent will provide a written response accordingly, which shall then form part of the Proposal.

9. No Collusion

No Proponent may discuss or communicate about, directly or indirectly, the preparation or content of its Proposal with any other Proponent or the agent or representative of any other Proponent or prospective Proponent. If the City discovers there has been a breach at any time, the City reserves the right to disqualify the Proposal or terminate any ensuing Agreement.

10. Prohibition against Gratuities

No Proponent and no employee, agent or representative of the Proponent, may offer or give any gratuity in the form of entertainment, participation in social events, gifts or otherwise to any officer, director, agent, appointee or employee of the City in connection with or arising from this RFP, whether for the pur-pose of securing an Agreement or seeking favourable treatment in respect to the award or amendment of the Agreement or influencing the performance of the Agreement, including without restriction enforcement of performance standards, or expressing appreciation, or providing compensation, for the award of an Agreement or for performance of the City's obligations thereunder or for conferring favours or being lenient, or in any other manner whatsoever.

If the City determines that this article has been breached by or with respect to a Proponent, the City may exclude its Proposal from consideration, or if an Agreement has already been entered into, may terminate it without incurring any liability.

11. Acceptance of Proposals

The City shall not be obliged to accept any Proposal in response to this RFP.

The City may, without incurring any liability or cost to any Proponent: a) accept or reject any or all Proposal(s) at any time; b) waive immaterial defects and minor irregularities in any Proposals; c) modify and/or cancel this RFP prior to accepting any Proposal; d) award a contract in whole or in part.

The City is relying on the experience and expertise of the Proponent. The City reserves the right to disqualify any Proponent who has given inaccurate, incomplete, false or misleading information in the sole opinion of the City.

12. Verification

The City reserves the right to verify with any Proponent or with any other person any information provided in its Proposal but shall be under no obligation to receive further information.

If, in the opinion of the City, any Proponent has clearly misinterpreted the services or underestimated the hours or value of the services to be performed as reflected in its Proposal content and submitted price/fees, or all or any or any combination of them, then the City may reject its Proposal as not representative of the scope of the services).

13. Unbalanced Bids (In this paragraph “Bid” refers to the Proposal)

The City may reject a bid if it determines, in its sole discretion, that the bid is materially imbalanced.

A bid is materially imbalanced when:

(1) it is based on prices which are significantly less than cost for some items of work and prices which are significantly overstated in relation to cost for other items of work; and

61 of 112

Viewing Copy

(2) the City had determined that the proposal may not result in the lowest overall cost to the City

even though it may be the lowest submitted bid; or

(3) it is so unbalanced as to be tantamount to allowing an advance payment.

14. Conflicts of Interest In its Proposal, the Proponent must disclose to the City any potential conflict of interest that might compromise the performance of the Work or which might reasonably compromise or provide the Proponent with an unfair advantage in the bidding process. If such a conflict of interest does exist, the City may, at its discretion, refuse to consider the Proposal. For clarity, without limiting the generality of the foregoing, prior to or when submitting its Proposal, the Proponent must disclose to the City where the Proponent is currently retained by developer(s) to conduct work related to development application(s) for adjacent property(ies) along Steeles Avenue East from Kennedy Road to Midland Avenue with regard to development, site plan, and/or rezoning application(s) and, where such a conflict of interest exists, the City will refuse to consider the Proposal.

The Proponent must also disclose whether it is aware of any City employee, Council member or member of a City agency, board or commission or employee thereof having a financial interest in the Proponent and the nature of that interest. If such an interest exists or arises during the evaluation process or the negotiation of the Agreement, the City may, at its discretion, refuse to consider the Proposal or withhold the awarding of any Agreement to the Proponent until the matter is resolved to the City’s sole satisfaction.

If, during the Proposal evaluation process or the negotiation of the Agreement, the Proponent is retained by another client giving rise to a potential conflict of interest, then the Proponent will so inform the City. If the City requests, then the Proponent will refuse the new assignment or will take such steps as are necessary to remove the conflict of interest concerned.

Proponents are cautioned that the acceptance of their Proposal may preclude them from participating as a Proponent in subsequent projects where a conflict of interest may arise. The successful Proponent for this project may participate in subsequent/other City projects provided the successful Proponent has satisfied pre-qualification requirements of the City, if any, and in the opinion of the City, no conflict of interest would adversely affect the performance and successful completion of an Agreement by the successful Proponent.

15. Ownership and Confidentiality of City-Provided Data

All correspondence, documentation and information provided by City staff to any Proponent or prospec-tive Proponent in connection with, or arising out of this RFP, the Services or the acceptance of any Proposal:

a) is and shall remain the property of the City; b) must be treated by Proponents and prospective Proponents as confidential; c) must not be used for any purpose other than for replying to this RFP, and for fulfillment of any

related subsequent Agreement.

16. Ownership and Disclosure of Proposal Documentation

The documentation comprising any Proposal submitted in response to this RFP, along with all correspondence, documentation and information provided to the City by any Proponent in connection with, or arising out of this RFP, once received by the City:

a) shall become the property of the City and may be appended to the Agreement and/or Purchase Order with the successful Proponent;

b) shall become subject to the Municipal Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act ("MFIPPA"), and may be released, pursuant to that Act.

Because of MFIPPA, prospective Proponents are advised to identify in their Proposal material any scientific, technical, commercial, proprietary or similar confidential information, the disclosure of which could cause them injury.

62 of 112

Viewing Copy

Each Proponent’s name at a minimum shall be made public. Proposals will be made available to members of City Council provided that their requests have been made in accordance with the City’s procedure and may be released to members of the public pursuant to MFIPPA.

17. Intellectual Property Rights

Each Proponent warrants that the information contained in its Proposal does not infringe any intellectual property right of any third party and agrees to indemnify and save harmless the City, its staff and its consultants, if any, against all claims, actions, suits and proceedings, including all costs incurred by the City brought by any person in respect of the infringement or alleged infringement of any patent, copyright, trademark, or other intellectual property right in connection with their Proposal.

18. Failure or Default of Proponent

If the Proponent, for any reason, fails or defaults in respect of any matter or thing which is an obligation of the Proponent under the terms of the RFP, the City may disqualify the Proponent from the RFP and/or from competing for future tenders or RFP issued by the City for a period of one year. In addition, the City may at its option either:

a) Consider that the Proponent has withdrawn any offer made, or abandoned the Agreement if the offer has been accepted, whereupon the acceptance, if any, of the City shall be null and void; or

b) Require the Proponent to pay the City the difference between its Proposal and any other Proposal which the City accepts, if the latter is for a greater amount and, in addition, to pay the City any cost which the City may incur by reason of the Proponent’s failure or default, and further the Proponent will indemnify and save harmless the City, its officers, employees and agents from all loss, damage, liability, cost, charge and expense whatever which it, they or any of them may suffer, incur or be put to by reason of such default or failure of the Proponent.

19. Quasi-Criminal/Criminal Activity of a Proponent:

The City may reject a Proposal or Proponent if the City:

a) Confirms that the Proponent or any individual that owns, directs, or controls the Proponent has been charged with or convicted of an offence under the Criminal Code, an offence as defined in the Provincial Offences Act, or an offence pursuant to similar laws outside of Ontario;

b) Determines that this charge or conviction is material to the given procurement; and

c) Determines that, in light of this charge or conviction, awarding to that Bidder could compromise the delivery of the goods or services or would otherwise undermine the business reputation of the City or the public's confidence in the integrity of the call process.

20. Publicity

The Proponent and its affiliates, associates, third-party service providers, and subcontractors shall not release for publication any information in connection with this RFP or any Agreement without prior written permission of the City.

21. Governing Law

This RFP and any Proposal submitted in response to it and the process contemplated by this RFP including any ensuing Agreement shall be governed by the laws of the Province of Ontario. Any dispute arising out of this RFP or this RFP process will be determined by a court of competent jurisdiction in the Province of Ontario.

63 of 112

Viewing Copy

APPENDIX B

AGREEMENT TERMS AND CONDITIONS

1. Priority of Documents ................................................................................................. 65 2. Compliance with Laws ..................................................................................................... 65 3. Non-Exclusivity ................................................................................................................ 65 4. Confidentiality and Conflict of Interest ............................................................................ 65 5. Indemnities........................................................................................................................ 65 6. Intellectual Property Indemnity ........................................................................................ 65 7. Employment & WSIB Indemnity ..................................................................................... 66 8. No Assignment ................................................................................................................. 66 9. Sub-Contractors ................................................................................................................ 66 10. Personnel and Performance............................................................................................... 66 11. Independent Contractor ..................................................................................................... 66 12. Insurance ........................................................................................................................... 66 13. Warranties and Covenants ................................................................................................ 67 14. Third Party Software ......................................................................................................... 67 15. Ownership of Intellectual Property and Deliverables ....................................................... 68 16. Payment Schedule ............................................................................................................. 68 17. Termination Provisions ..................................................................................................... 68 18. Right to Audit ................................................................................................................... 69 19. Occupational Health and Safety ........................................................................................ 69 20. Workplace Safety and Insurance Act ................................................................................ 70 21. Accessibility Standards and Customer Service Training Requirements ........................... 70

Note to Appendix: The terms set out in this Appendix shall be incorporated in any Agreement entered into with the recommended Proponent substantially in the form as presented in the Appendix. These terms are mandatory and are not negotiable. Any Proponent wishing to request that the City consider any changes to the terms and conditions set out in Appendix "B" must follow the process outlined in section 5 of Appendix "A".

64 of 112

Viewing Copy

1. Priority of Documents In the event of any inconsistency or conflict in the contents of the following documents, such documents shall take precedence and govern in the following descending order:

(a) RFP Addenda; (b) RFP including all schedules and appendices; and (c) Vendor's Proposal.

Later dates shall govern within each of the above categories of documents. 2. Compliance with Laws

The Vendor will be required to comply, at its sole expense, with all federal, provincial and municipal laws, rules and regulations (including, without limitation, the City's Fair Wage and other policies or by-laws applicable to the City's vendors, the Ontario Fire Code, the Ontario Employment Standards Act, the Ontario Human Rights Code, the Ontario Labour Relations Act, the Workplace Safety and Insurance Act, the Income Tax Act and Occupational Health and Safety requirements) in relation to the provision of any Services, including the obtaining of all necessary permits and licenses, and shall submit proof of such compliance to the City, upon request, and the Vendor shall indemnify and save the City harmless from any liability or cost suffered by it as a result of the vendor's failure to comply with this provision.

3. Non-Exclusivity

The awarding of an Agreement to a Vendor shall not be a guarantee of exclusivity.

4. Confidentiality and Conflict of Interest

The Vendor shall treat as confidential all information of any kind which comes to the attention of the Vendor in the course of carrying out the Services and shall not disseminate such information for any reason without the express written permission of the City or otherwise in accordance with MFIPPA or other applicable privacy law. The Vendor may be required to enter into a detailed confidentiality and conflict of interest agreement in a form satisfactory to the City Solicitor.

The Vendor shall (a) avoid any Conflict of Interest in the performance of its contractual obligations; (b) disclose to the City without delay any actual or potential Conflict of Interest that arises during the performance of its contractual obligations; and (c) comply with any requirements prescribed by the City to resolve any Conflict of Interest. In addition to all other contractual rights or rights available at law or in equity, the City may immediately terminate the Contract upon giving notice to the Vendor where: (a) the Vendor fails to disclose an actual or potential Conflict of Interest; (b) the Vendor fails to comply with any requirements prescribed by the City to resolve or manage a Conflict of Interest; or (c) the Vendor's Conflict of Interest cannot be resolved to the City's reasonable satisfaction.

5. Indemnities

The Vendor shall indemnify and save harmless the City of Toronto, its Mayor, Members of Council, officers, employees, and agents from and against any losses, liens, charges, claims, demands, suits, proceedings, recoveries and judgements (including legal fees and costs) arising from or related to the Vendor's performance or non-performance of its obligations, including payment obligations to its approved subcontractors and suppliers and others, and including breach of any confidentiality obligations under this Agreement.

Upon assuming the defence of any action covered under this section the Vendor shall keep City of Toronto reasonably informed of the status of the matter, and the Vendor shall make no admission of liability or fault on City of Toronto's part without City of Toronto's written permission.

6. Intellectual Property Indemnity

The Vendor shall indemnify and save harmless the City of Toronto, its Mayor, Members of Council, officers, employees, and agents from and against any losses, liens, charges, claims, demands, suits,

65 of 112

Viewing Copy

proceedings, recoveries and judgements (including legal fees and costs) arising from infringement, actual or alleged, by the Proposal, its use or misuse, or by any of the deliverables developed or provided or supplied under or used in connection with the Services (including the provision of the Services themselves), of any Canadian, American or other copyright, moral right, trade-mark, patent, trade secret or other thing with respect to which a right in the nature of intellectual/industrial property exists.

7. Employment & WSIB Indemnity

Nothing under this Agreement shall render the City responsible for any employment, benefit or termination liability (including those under or in connection with the Workplace Safety and Insurance Act, 1997 or any successor legislation ("WSIA"), whether statutorily required, at common law or otherwise, resulting from Services supplied under this Agreement by persons employed or otherwise engaged by the Vendor. In the event that employment related costs, or other related responsibility falls to the City for any reason whatsoever, the Vendor agrees to indemnify the City for such costs.

8. No Assignment

The Vendor shall not assign any part of the project that may be awarded to it under the Agreement without the prior written consent of the City, which consent shall not be unreasonably withheld. However, such written consent shall not under any circumstances relieve the Vendor of its liabilities and obligations under this RFP and the Agreement.

9. Sub-Contractors

The Vendor shall be solely responsible for the payment of every subcontractor employed, engaged, or retained by it for the purpose of assisting it in the performance of its obligations under the Agreement. The Vendor shall coordinate the services of its subcontractors in a manner acceptable to the City, and ensure that they comply with all the relevant requirements of the Agreement.

The Vendor shall be liable to the City for all costs or damages arising from acts, omissions, negligence or wilful misconduct of its subcontractors.

10. Personnel and Performance

The Vendor shall make available appropriately skilled workers, consultants or subcontractors, as appropriate, and must be able to provide the necessary materials, tools, machinery and supplies to carry out the project.

The Vendor shall be responsible for its own staff resources and for the staff resources of any subcontractors and third-party service providers.

The Vendor shall ensure that its personnel (including those of approved sub-contractors), when using any City buildings, premises, equipment, hardware or software shall comply with all security policies, regulations or directives relating to those buildings, premises, equipment, hardware or software.

Personnel assigned by the Vendor to perform or produce the Services or any part of it, (including those of approved subcontractors) may, in the sole discretion of the City, be required to sign non-disclosure Agreement(s) satisfactory to the City before being permitted to perform such services.

11. Independent Contractor

The Vendor and the City agree and acknowledge that the relationship between the City and the Vendor is one of owner and independent contractor and not one of employer-employee. Neither is there any intention to create a partnership, joint venture or joint enterprise between the Vendor and the City.

12. Insurance

The successful vendor agrees to purchase and maintain in force, at its own expense and for the duration of the services, the following policies of insurance, which policies shall be in a form and with an insurer acceptable to the City. A certificate evidencing these policies signed by the insurer or an authorized agent of the insurer must be delivered to the City prior to the commencement of services:

66 of 112

Viewing Copy

1. Commercial General Liability provided that the policy:

(i) is in the amount of not less than Two Million Dollars ($2,000,000.00), per occurrence; (ii) adds the City of Toronto as an additional insured; (iii) includes Non Owned Automobile Liability, Employer's Liability and/or Contingent Employer's

Liability, and any other provision relevant to the services; (iv) includes a clause which will provide the City with thirty (30) days' prior written notice of

cancellation or material change in coverage.

2. Professional Liability (errors and omissions) coverage provided that the policy:

(i) is in the amount of not less than Two Million Dollars ($2,000,000); (ii) will extend to infringement of copyright and other intellectual property, including misuse of

trade secrets, if appropriate.

Notwithstanding anything to the contrary contained in this Agreement, kept in full force and effect for a period of time ending no sooner than TWO YEARS after the termination or expiry of this Agreement, as the case may be.

3. Automobile Liability insurance with a minimum limit of One Million Dollars ($1,000,000) for all

owned or leased licensed motorized vehicles used in the performance of services. It is understood and agreed that the coverage and limits of liability noted above are not to be construed as the limit of liability of the vendor in the performance of services. It is also agreed that the above insurance policies may be subject to reasonable deductible amounts, which deductible amounts shall be borne by the vendor. At the expiry of the policies of insurance, original signed Certificates evidencing renewal will be provided to the City without notice or demand. The successful vendor is responsible for any loss or damage whatsoever to any of the its materials, goods, equipment or supplies and will maintain appropriate all-risk coverage as any prudent owner of such materials, goods, supplies and equipment. The successful vendor shall have no claim against the City or the City’s insurers for any damage or loss to its property and shall require its property insurers to waive any right of subrogation against the City.

13. Warranties and Covenants

The Vendor represents, warrants and covenants to the City (and acknowledges that the City is relying thereon) that any deliverable resulting from or to be supplied or developed under the Agreement will be in accordance with the City’s functional and technical requirements (as set out in the RFP) and, if applicable, will function or otherwise perform in accordance with such requirements.

14. Third Party Software

Where the City is in possession of software containing or constituting confidential proprietary information belonging to third parties, the Vendor shall not, except in the usual incidental manner genuinely necessary for the intended use of such software on the equipment of the City, (a) analyze, copy, decompile, disassemble, translate, convert, reverse engineer or duplicate any physical

embodiment or part thereof, or permit any person to do so; or (b) divulge to any unauthorized person the ideas, concepts or techniques, or make any other improper use,

of such software.

The Vendor shall fully defend, save harmless and indemnify the City from and against any loss or damages suffered by the City as a result of any failure by the Vendor, its officers, directors, partners, contract personnel, agents and employees or any of them to comply with the provisions hereof.

67 of 112

Viewing Copy

Should the Vendor include third party components within the Solution, the Vendor must secure the rights to use and repackage third party components and pass on those rights to the City without additional charges.

15. Ownership of Intellectual Property and Deliverables

The City will own all intellectual property rights, including (without limitation) copyright, in and to all deliverables provided by the Vendor and its subcontractors. All information, data, plans, specifications, reports, estimates, summaries, photographs and all other documentation prepared by the Vendor in the performance of the Services under the Agreement, whether they be in draft or final format, shall be the exclusive property of the City.

16. Payment Schedule

A payment schedule satisfactory to the City shall form part of the Agreement.

No fees or reimbursable expenses shall become payable to the Vendor pursuant to the Agreement other than pursuant to one or more signed schedules.

The Vendor shall submit invoices in such detail as may be required by the City, and the City reserves the right to require further proof or documentation from the Vendor in respect of services performed or expenses incurred by the Vendor and the Vendor shall provide, without delay, such further proof or documentation.

If the City does not approve of the Services which are the subject of the invoice, the City shall advise the Vendor in writing of the reasons for non-approval and the Vendor shall remedy the problem at no additional cost to the City before the City shall be obliged to pay the invoice or any part of it, as the case may be.

The Vendor shall be solely responsible for the payment of all personnel costs including statutory and otherwise (including without limitation subcontractors and suppliers and their respective personnel) made available by it and used for performance of any of the Services.

17. Termination Provisions

Upon giving the Vendor not less than thirty (30) days’ prior written notice, the City may, at any time and without cause, cancel the Agreement, in whole or in part. In the event of such cancellation, the City shall not incur any liability to the Vendor apart from the payment for the goods, material, articles, equipment, work or services that have been satisfactorily delivered or performed by the Vendor at the time of cancellation.

Failure of the Vendor to perform its obligations under the Agreement shall entitle the City to terminate the Agreement upon ten (10) calendar days’ written notice to the Vendor if a breach which is remediable is not rectified in that time. In the event of such termination, the City shall not incur any liability to the Vendor apart from the payment for the goods, material, articles, equipment, work or services that have been satisfactorily delivered or performed by the Vendor at the time of termination.

All rights and remedies of the City for any breach of the Vendor's obligations under the Agreement shall be cumulative and not exclusive or mutually exclusive alternatives and may be exercised singularly, jointly or in combination and shall not be deemed to be in exclusion of any other rights or remedies available to the City under the Agreement or otherwise at law.

No delay or omission by the City in exercising any right or remedy shall operate as a waiver of them or of any other right or remedy, and no single or partial exercise of a right or remedy shall preclude any other or further exercise of them or the exercise of any other right or remedy.

Upon termination, all originals and copies of data, plans, specifications, reports, estimates, summaries, photographs, and other documents that have been accumulated and/or prepared by the Vendor in performance of the Agreement shall be delivered to the City in a clean and readable format.

68 of 112

Viewing Copy

17. Right to Audit

The City may audit all financial and related records associated with the terms of the Agreement including timesheets, reimbursable out of pocket expenses, materials, goods, and equipment claimed by the Vendor. The Vendor shall at all times during the term of the contract, and for a period of seven (7) years following completion of the Agreement, keep and maintain records of the Work performed pursuant to this Agreement. This shall include proper records of invoices, vouchers, timesheets, and other documents that support actions taken by the Vendor. The Vendor shall at his own expense make such records available for inspection and audit by the City at all reasonable times. 18. Occupational Health and Safety a. The Vendor shall comply with all federal, provincial or municipal occupational health and safety

legislative requirements, including, and without limitation, the Occupational Health and Safety Act, R.S.O., 1990 c.0.1 and all regulations thereunder, as amended from time to time (collectively the "OHSA").

b. Nothing in this section shall be construed as making the City the "employer" (as defined in the

OHSA) of any workers employed or engaged by the Vendor for the Services, either instead of or jointly with the Vendor.

c. The Vendor agrees that it will ensure that all subcontractors engaged by it are qualified to perform the

Services and that the employees of subcontractors are trained in the health and safety hazards expected to be encountered in the Services.

d. The Vendor acknowledges and represents that:

i. The workers employed to carry out the Services have been provided with training in the hazards of the Services to be performed and possess the knowledge and skills to allow them to work safely;

ii. The Vendor has provided, and will provide during the course of the agreement, all necessary

personal protective equipment for the protection of workers;

iii. The Vendor’s supervisory employees are competent, as defined in the OHSA, and will carry out their duties in a diligent and responsible manner with due consideration for the health and safety of workers;

iv. The Vendor has in place an occupational health and safety , workplace violence and workplace harassment policies in accordance with the OHSA; and

v. The Vendor has a process in place to ensure that health and safety issues are identified and addressed and a process in place for reporting work-related injuries and illnesses.

e. The Vendor shall provide, at the request of the General Manager or his designate, the following as

proof of the representations made in paragraph d(i) and d(iv):

i. documentation regarding the training programs provided or to be provided during the Services (i.e. types of training, frequency of training and re-training); and

ii. the occupational health and safety policy.

f. The Vendor shall immediately advise the General Manager or his designate in the event of any of the

following:

69 of 112

Viewing Copy

i. A critical injury that arises out of Services that is the subject of this agreement;

ii. An order(s) is issued to the Vendor by the Ministry of Labour arising out of the Services that is the subject of this agreement;

iii. A charge is laid or a conviction is entered arising out of the Services that is the subject of this agreement, including but not limited to a charge or conviction under the OHSA, the Criminal Code, R.S.C 1985, c. C-46, as amended and the Workplace Safety and Insurance Act, 1997, S.O. 1997, c. 16, Sched. A, as amended.

g. The Vendor shall be responsible for any delay in the progress of the Services as a result of any

violation or alleged violation of any federal, provincial or municipal health and safety requirement by the Vendor, it being understood that no such delay shall be a force majeure or uncontrollable circumstance for the purposes of extending the time for performance of the Services for entitling the Vendor to additional compensation, and the Vendor shall take all necessary steps to avoid delay in the final completion of the Services without additional cost to the City.

h. The parties acknowledge and agree that employees of the City, including senior officers, have no authority to direct, and will not direct, how employees, workers or other persons employed or engaged by the Vendor do work or perform a task that is the subject of this agreement.

19. Workplace Safety and Insurance Act The Vendor shall secure, maintain and pay all costs for Workplace Safety and Insurance Board ("WSIB") workers’ compensation coverage for its employees providing Services under this agreement, whether required statutorily or not under the Workplace Safety and Insurance Act, 1997. The Vendor represents and warrants that it shall be in good standing with the WSIB throughout the term of this agreement. Prior to supplying the Services and prior to receiving payment, the Vendor shall produce a Clearance Certificate issued by the WSIB confirming that the Vendor has paid its assessment based on a true statement of the amount of its current payroll in respect of the Services and that the City is relieved of financial liability. Thereafter, throughout the period of Services being supplied, a new Clearance Certificate will be obtained from the WSIB by the Vendor and provided to the City every 90 days or upon expiry of the Certificate's validity period whichever comes first. The Vendor shall ensure that any and all persons, including but not limited to volunteers, students, subcontractors and independent contractors, providing services under this agreement, have secured WSIB coverage, whether required statutorily or not, for the term of this agreement. 20. Accessibility Standards and Customer Service Training Requirements The Vendor must ensure that all deliverables conform to the requirements of the Accessibility for Ontarians with Disabilities Act, 2005. The Vendor shall require all applicable personnel (including those of its subcontractors) to fulfill the training requirements set out in the City's policy on Accessible Customer Service Training Requirements for Contractors, Consultants and other Services Providers. For a copy of the City of Toronto requirement, visit the website at: http://www1.toronto.ca/wps/portal/contentonly?vgnextoid=aa2f637314522410VgnVCM10000071d60f89RCRD&vgnextfmt=default

70 of 112

Viewing Copy

APPENDIX C

STANDARD SUBMISSION FORMS

FORM 1: Proposal Submission Form – Mandatory

FORM 2: Policy to Exclude Bids From External Parties Involved in the Preparation or Development of a Specific Call/Request - Mandatory

FORM 3: Restrictions on the Hiring and Use of Former City of Toronto Management

Employees for City Contracts – If Applicable

FORM 4: Environmentally Responsible Procurement – If Applicable FORM 5: Notice of No Submission FORM 6: Declaration of Compliance with Anti-Harassment/Discrimination Legislation and

City Policy

71 of 112

Viewing Copy

FORM 2

POLICY TO EXCLUDE BIDS FROM EXTERNAL PARTIES INVOLVED IN THE PREPARATION OR DEVELOPMENT OF A SPECIFIC CALL/REQUEST

To ensure Fair and Equal Treatment in its competitive procurements, the City of Toronto will undertake to:

disallow bidders/proponent from submitting a bid to any Tender, Quotation, or Proposal call in which the bidders/proponent has participated in the preparation of the call document; and

a bidder/proponent who fails to comply will result in disqualification of their response to the call/request.

Did you, the proponent, assist the City of Toronto in the preparation of this Request for Proposal call? Specify: Yes _______ No _________ For a copy of the City of Toronto Policy, visit the website at http://www.toronto.ca/citybusiness/pdf/bidsfromexternalparties.pdf

73 of 112

Viewing Copy

FORM 3

RESTRICTIONS ON THE HIRING AND USE OF FORMER CITY OF TORONTO MANAGEMENT EMPLOYEES FOR CITY CONTRACTS

The purpose of this Policy to ensure that former City of Toronto management employees who took part in a separation program or received a retirement package, are prohibited from participating in contracts directly or indirectly related to the City of Toronto or its special purpose bodies for a period of two years starting from an employee’s separation date.

Former employees covered by this policy are prohibited from participating in contracts directly or indirectly related to the City of Toronto or its special purpose bodies for a period of two years starting from the employee’s separation date. This would include, but not be limited to, for example, the following roles:

As an independent contractor/consultant; As a contractor/consultant on City project Work for a company/firm (but, the firm may compete); or As a contractor/consultant on City project Work for a company/firm that has been sub-contracted by

another company/firm.

Former City of Toronto management employees who took part in a separation program or received a retirement incentive are prohibited from participating in contracts directly or indirectly related to the City of Toronto and its special purpose bodies for a period of two years starting from an employee’s termination date.

Notes: (1) Adopted by Council at its meeting of February 4, 5, & 6, 1998, Report No. 2, Clause No. 2 of the Strategic Policies and Priorities Committee, and

Revised by City Council at its meeting of November 26, 27, 28, 2002, Report No. 14, Clause No. 6, Administration Committee.

Respondents are to state the name(s) of any former City of Toronto management employee(s) hired/used by your firm, if any, who have left the employ of the City or its special purpose bodies within the last two years.

Specify: .

This policy will be considered in the evaluation of all submissions received by the City of Toronto.

For further information contact:

Manager, Corporate Purchasing, Policy & Quality Assurance 18th

Floor, West Tower, City Hall, (416) 392-0387 For a copy of the City of Toronto Policy, visit the website at http://www.toronto.ca/calldocuments/pdf/former_employees.pdf

74 of 112

Viewing Copy

FORM 4 ENVIRONMENTALLY RESPONSIBLE PROCUREMENT STATEMENT

The City of Toronto Environmentally Responsible Procurement Policy encourages bidders to also offer products/services that are environmentally preferred.

Environmentally preferred products/services offered must be competitive in cost, conform to specifications, performance requirements and, be suitable for the intended application as determined by the using department(s)

Environmentally preferred products/services are those such as durable products, reusable products, energy efficient products, low pollution products/services, products (including those used in services) containing maximum levels of post-consumer waste and/or recyclable content, and products which provide minimal impact to the environment.

An environmentally preferred product is one that is less harmful to the environment than the next best alternative having characteristics including, but not limited to the following:

1. Reduce waste and make efficient use of resources: An Environmentally Preferred Product would be a product that is more energy, fuel, or water efficient, or that uses less paper, ink, or other resources. For example, energy-efficient lighting, and photocopiers capable of double-sided photocopying.

2. Are reusable or contain reusable parts: These products such as rechargeable batteries, reusable building partitions, and laser printers with refillable toner cartridges.

3. Are recyclable: A product will be considered to be an Environmentally Preferred Product if local facilities exist capable of recycling the product at the end of its useful life.

4. Contain recycled materials: An Environmentally Preferred Product contains post-consumer recycled content. An example is paper products made from recycled post-consumer fibre.

5. Produce fewer polluting by-products and/or safety hazards during manufacture, use or disposal: An EPP product would be a non-hazardous product that replaces a hazardous product.

6. Have a long service-life and/or can be economically and effectively repaired to upgraded.

Bidders shall if requested, provide written verification of any environmental claims made in their bid/Proposal satisfactory to the City of Toronto within five (5) working days of request at no cost to the City. Verification may include, but not be limited to, certification to recognized environmental program (e.g., Environmental Choice Program [ECP]), independent laboratory tests or manufacturer's certified tests, Only proven environmentally preferred products/services shall be offered. Experimental or prototype products/services will not be considered.

For a copy of the City of Toronto Environmentally Responsible Procurement Policy, visit the website at http://www.toronto.ca/calldocuments/pdf/environment_procurement.pdf

State if environmentally preferred products/service is being offered: YES______ NO______

State briefly the environmental benefit of the product/service offered:

__________________________________________________________________________

__________________________________________________________________________

75 of 112

Viewing Copy

IMPORTANT - PLEASE READ THIS It is important to the City of Toronto to receive a reply from all invited Proponents. There is no obligation to submit a Proposal; however, should you choose not to submit, completion of this form will assist the City in determining the type of services you are interested in submitting a Proposal in the future. INSTRUCTIONS: If you are unable, or do not wish to submit a Proposal on this Request for Proposals, please complete the following portions of this form. State your reason for not submitting a Proposal by checking applicable box(es) or by explaining briefly in the space provided. It is not necessary to return any other Request for Proposals documents. 1. We do not offer this service. Other reasons or additional comments. 2. We do not offer services to these requirements. 3. Unable to offer services competitively. 4. Cannot handle due to present commitments. 5. Quantity/project too large. 6. Cannot meet delivery/completion requirements. 7. Licensing restrictions. Do you wish to participate in Request for Proposals for services in the future? YES ____ NO ____

For City’s use only - Do not write in this space. Company Name:

Address:

Signature of Company Representative:

Position:

Date: Tel. No.: Fax No.:

Fax: 416-397-7779

FORM 5

NOTICE OF “NO SUBMISSION”

RFP # : 9121-15-7194 ML

CLOSING DATE: August 26, 2015

76 of 112

Viewing Copy

FORM 6

Declaration of Compliance with Anti-Harassment/Discrimination Legislation & City Policy

Organizations/individuals in Ontario, including the City of Toronto, have obligations under the Ontario Human Rights Code, the Occupational Health and Safety Act, the Employment Standards Act, the Accessibility for Ontarians with Disabilities Act, the Criminal Code of Canada and the Charter of Rights and Freedoms. In addition, the City of Toronto also has policies that prohibit discrimination on the additional grounds of political affiliation or level of literacy, subject to the requirements of the Charter. Organizations are required to have and post policies, programs, information, instruction, plans and/or other supports, and an appropriate internal process available to their employees and service recipients to prevent, address and remedy discrimination, racism, harassment, hate and inaccessibility complaints under the applicable legislation and including the additional grounds of discrimination prohibited under City policy. Individuals are obliged to refrain from harassment/hate activity. The City of Toronto requires all organizations and individuals that contract with the City to sign the following Declaration of Compliance with Anti-Harassment/Discrimination Legislation & City Policy. This Declaration must be signed by your organization and submitted with the contract or Letter of Understanding. The name of your organization and the fact that you have signed this declaration may be included in a public report to City Council. Declaration:

I/we uphold our obligations under the above provincial and federal legislation. In addition, I/we uphold our obligations under City policies which prohibit harassment/discrimination on a number of grounds including political affiliation and level of literacy. WHERE LEGALLY MANDATED I/we have in place the necessary policies, programs, information, instruction, plans and/or other supports that are consistent with our obligations, and I/we have an internal process available to my/our employees and service recipients to prevent, address and remedy discrimination, racism, harassment, hate and inaccessibility complaints. I/we agree that I/we shall, upon the request of the City, provide evidence of the policies, programs, information, instruction, plans and other supports and an appropriate internal complaint resolution process required under this Declaration which is sufficient to allow the City to determine compliance. I/We acknowledge that failure to demonstrate compliance with this declaration to the satisfaction of the operating Division, in consultation with the City Solicitor, may result in the termination of the contract. Name of Vendor or Name of Grant Applicant (Organization or Individual): Complete Address: Email _____________________________ Tel. No. ____________________________ Postal Code: Fax No. ____________________________ Name of Signing Officer or Name of Applicant (Name – please print): Position

Signature: Date: Authorised Signing Officer or Individual

Multilingual Services: 311 and TTY 416-338-0889.Further information: www.toronto.ca/diversity.ca

Gro

up/V

endo

r/In

divi

dual

Nam

e:

Dat

e:

For

Offi

ce U

se O

nly

DE

CL

AR

AT

ION

OF

CO

MP

LIA

NC

E W

ITH

AN

TI-

HA

RA

SS

ME

NT

/DIS

CR

IMIN

AT

ION

LE

GIS

LA

TIO

N &

CIT

Y P

OL

ICY

77 of 112

Viewing Copy

APPENDIX D PRICE DETAIL FORMS

The Pricing Schedule for this RFP must be submitted in the same or similar format as below, and must contain the following information at minimum. For instructions on completing this form, see section 5.3, subsection 8. Table 1 – Total Cost of Service

Item Description Price

1. Total Fees to complete the Scope of Work as indicated in Section 3.0.

$

2. Upset Limit for Disbursements $

3. Contingency $ 40,000.00

4. HST (13%) $

5. Total Lump Sum Price *Total Lump Sum Price will be used in the Evaluation of the Proposal*

$

6.

Provisional: Additional geotechnical, soil chemical, and hydro-geological investigations as per Section 3.1 Task 3 Subsection xi – price 2 (two) boreholes * Cost of Provisional Boreholes will be used in the Evaluation of the Proposal*

$

Table 2 – Breakdown of Table 1 Proponents must indicate in the blank space provided below or on a separate sheet the breakdown for the proposed total cost of services.

Total Fees Breakdown of the Cost of Services Cost

a $____________

b $____________

c $____________

Total Fees (excluding HST, disbursements)* Insert this total into line item 1 in Table 1 above

$____________

78 of 112

Viewing Copy

Table 3 – Hourly Rates Please include below or on a separate sheet an hourly rate for all levels of Proponent’s professional, managerial and clerical staff to be used for information purposes only regarding any future/follow-on work pertaining to this RFP:

Hourly Rates (Per Diem Rates will be based on 8 hours) as applicable: Position, Name _______________________, _____________________________ _______________________, _____________________________ _______________________, _____________________________ _______________________, _____________________________ _______________________, _____________________________ _______________________, _____________________________ _______________________, _____________________________

Hourly Rates $______________ $______________ $______________ $______________ $______________ $______________ $______________

Definitions to Price Detail Forms: “Total Fees” - Total Fee for the EA Study as outlined in the RFP excluding Disbursements,

Contingency, Taxes and Additional Service. “Contingency Amount” $40,000 allowance for additional work that is authorized by owner. Do not

add overhead, profit or any taxes to this amount when calculating the total bid price. The unused portion is credit to the contract.

“Disbursements” - This fee represents costs that are required for the Proponent to provide

services and items to complete all aspects of the scope of services as outlined in this RFP. Example of disbursements may include miscellaneous reproduction, travel, printing of reports, public meeting displays and materials, courier and fax, etc.

79 of 112

Viewing Copy

APPENDIX E PROPOSAL EVALUATION TABLE

EVALUATION CRITERIA FOR PROPOSALS Available

Points

A. Mandatory Submission Requirements (per Section 5.2) Pass/Fail B. Mandatory Technical Submission Requirements (per Section 5.3, Subsection 3) Pass/Fail C. Technical Proposal

Submission Overall Completeness. Comprehensive understanding of requirements. Compliance with RFP requirements

Overall impression of submission quality Unique insight, value-added opportunities Relevant corporate experience and commitment to quality

10

Proponent and Project Lead

Demonstrate specific knowledge of, and experience in performing projects of similar complexity, size, and scope

Relevant experience in urban transportation projects and with Municipal Class EA studies

o Demonstrate experience in Project Management including service delivery, time and cost control, co-coordinating multi-discipline teams

o Public consultation experience o Demonstrate experience in addressing the concerns and

working cooperatively with a variety of agencies, authorities, utilities, community, public and special interest groups

Time commitment of Project lead (listed in hours) Experience with Functional Design (SUE, Survey, Geotechnical /

Environmental, Utility relocation, Sanitary/Storm Management, , Road design, bridge structural design, Rail design, Streetscape design,)

15

Project Team and Resources

Comprehensive project team and resources, covering all required aspects of the work program

Team Organization o Roles/ specialties clearly defined o Logical reporting path for staff and sub-consultants o QA/QC Program

Experience of team members ( matching appropriately skilled staff and subs to tasks)

o Innovative, insightful traffic planning and engineering solutions o Experience with Engineering, SUE, Survey, Geotechnical /

Environmental, Utility relocation, Water/Sanitary/Storm Management, Municipal road design, Bridge structural design, Rail design, Rail crossings, Traffic Operations, Traffic Modeling, Community Planning, Urban Design, Natural Environment Assessment, Heritage, Archeology, and Public Consultation

20

Work Program and Deliverables

Comprehensiveness outline of all study elements and tasks (Content and Deliverables). Compliance with RFP requirements.

o Clear statement of deliverables o Quality of documentation and Content

Traffic operations analysis Understanding of study issues/ knowledge of study area

o Recognition of key technical issues Understanding of Functional Design Requirements (SUE, Survey,

Geotechnical / Environmental, Utility relocation, Water/Sanitary/Storm Management and Design, Road design, Bridge structural design, Rail design, Streetscape design)

20

80 of 112

Viewing Copy

Project Schedule

Comprehensive understanding of City timelines and requirements. Compliance with RFP requirements.

Logical sequence of activities Appropriate resources allocated by task ( time and effort)

15

Proponents must score a minimum of 60 out of 80 points (75%) in order to be further considered for cost. D. Cost of Services

Cost The lowest priced Proposal receives 20 points; and the remaining Proposals are assigned points based on the formula: [(lowest cost Proposal Proponent cost Proposal) x 20] *Cost includes item 5 and 6 of the Price Detail Form*

20

TOTAL SCORE (C+D) 100

81 of 112

Viewing Copy

APPENDIX F PROJECT EXPERIENCE FORM

Name of Firm:

PROJECT SUMMARY PROJECT DESCRIPTION CLIENT REFERENCE

PROJECT 1

Client:

Project Title: Contact:

Project Location: Phone:

Date Started: Fax:

Date Completed: Email:

Project Team:

Firm Role: (eg. Project Lead, Land Use Analysis etc.)

Firm Team Members and Roles:

PROJECT 2

Client:

Project Title: Contact:

Project Location: Phone:

Date Started: Fax:

Date Completed: Email:

Project Team:

Firm Role: (eg. Project Lead, Land Use Analysis etc.)

Firm Team Members and Roles:

PROJECT SUMMARY PROJECT DESCRIPTION CLIENT REFERENCE

PROJECT 3

Client:

Project Title: Contact:

Project Location: Phone:

Date Started: Fax:

Date Completed: Email:

Project Team:

Firm Role: (eg. Project Lead, Land Use Analysis etc.)

Firm Team Members and Roles:

82 of 112

Viewing Copy

Appendix G Phase 1 ESA – Sources of Information (Supplementary)

The following are some sources of information that could be collected as part of a desktop/baseline study for Phase 1 ESA - geotech information. This is not an exhaustive list but fairly extensive. A large amount of information is readily available through online searches. Include sites in proximity that may affect constructability. Online Records: -City Archives (photos, historical maps, fire insurance plans, air photos, etc.) -MNDM-Geology Ontario (geological reports and maps - pleistocene, bedrock contour maps, BH records, old pits and quarries report/map, etc.) -MOE (well records, CPUs, RSCs, etc.) -address specific searches (ESAs Phase I and II reports, etc.) -Google (Streets View - existing land use) City records: -City E&CS (engineering plans, creek maps, miscellaneous maps and plans, geoenv reports, BH logs, waste disposal site map, asbestos maps, development review files, DMOG mapping, etc) -Transportation Services (geotech reports resulting from ROW cut permits) -Toronto Water (spills, sewer monitor data) -Toronto Buildings (Permit Records, geotech reports, site plans) -Tax database (existing land use) -Toronto Archives (photos, maps, FIPs post 1924, correspondence, City Directories, etc.)

83 of 112

Viewing Copy

Appendix H Data Collection Assessments

All assessments and reports outlined within this appendix are to be completed as part of Task 3 – Data Collection and shall form part of Technical Memo No. 1 and No. 2 submission. Air Quality Screening Assessment The Vendor shall review the Air Quality Assessments completed from approved Environmental Assessments within the Study Area, including the Quality Assessment Report completed by RWDI Air Inc. as part of the Stouffville Corridor Rail Service Expansion Environmental Study Report, and reference findings as required. The Vendor shall carry out a screening level assessment of air quality conditions in relation to the proposed Study.

As part of the Screening Assessment, the Vendor shall: o Describe existing air quality conditions o Identify any contaminants of concerns. Contaminants may include but are not limited

to PM 2.5, PM 10, NOX, Benzene, CO, selective VOCs, etc. o Identify any sensitive receptors (e.g. childcare facilities, hospitals, nursing homes, schools,

etc…) o Estimate future conditions based on emissions (emissions data to be estimated through

traffic modelling software) and compare with base case emissions scenario. o Carry out a qualitative assessment of alternatives ( all EA phases), including the

identification of air quality criteria and measures.

The Vendor shall assess the preferred EA design and recommend measures during both the construction and operating phases of the undertaking to mitigate air quality impacts.

Based on the qualitative assessment, the Vendor shall make a recommendation as to whether an air

quality impact assessment (AQIA) is required. If an AQIA is required, the Vendor shall outline:

o if air dispersion modelling is required to asses impacts at the nearest sensitive receptors . (Note: If it is warranted, then future and base case conditions should be modelled for the preferred alternative to assess the impacts at the nearest sensitive receptors and determine the incremental differences.)

o The contaminants of concern that should be included in the AQIA. Natural Environment and Natural Heritage Assessment The Vendor shall identify and determine the impact on natural heritage features resources in relation to the proposed Study, as well as, develop a mitigation strategy for any issues identified. Natural Environment and Natural heritage features will include, but not be limited to:

Applicable natural heritage polices and guidelines; Fisheries and aquatic resources; Vegetation and flora; Geotechnical; Fluvial Geomorphology; Identification of rare, threatened or and endangered species and habitat under the ESA; Terrestrial natural habitats

84 of 112

Viewing Copy

Terrestrial Vegetation and wetlands; Wildlife and habitat; Watercourses and hydrological features (including source water protection); Surface and Groundwater hydrology; Surface water and fisheries; Soils and physiography; Land forms and physical features; Valley and stream corridors; Vegetation communities and species of concern; Significant aquatic features, including species and habitat; Environmentally Significant Areas; Source Water Protection Areas; and, Areas of Natural and Significant Interest.

The Vendor shall prepare a report describing the existing conditions, regulatory requirements, relative sensitivity and significance to consider during the evaluation of alternatives, and mitigation/monitoring for issues identified. Cultural Heritage and Cultural Heritage Landscape Screening Assessment The Vendor shall complete background historical research and preliminary feature identification. This work will include reviewing: available primary and secondary source material to produce a contextual overview of the study area, including the development of transportation infrastructure; available historic mapping, existing condition mapping, project mapping, and aerial photographs will be reviewed, if available, and relevant agencies and authorities will be contacted as necessary, in order to make a preliminary identification of existing built heritage features and cultural landscape units in relation to the proposed Study The Vendor shall conduct a field review to confirm findings. The Vendor shall prepare a report highlighting findings, including general description / graphics, regulatory requirements, any permit / approval requirements, relative sensitivity and significance to consider during the evaluation of alternatives, and mitigation/monitoring for issues identified. The report shall include at a minimum:

Introduction Purpose Methodology Existing Conditions Hertiage Recognition: Properties of Significance or Interest Screening of Alternatives Mitigation/Monitoring for issues identified Recommendations

85 of 112

Viewing Copy

Archaeology Assessment The Vendor shall conduct a Stage I Archaeological Assessment in relation to the proposed Study. If necessary, a Stage II archaeological assessment must be carried out for all lands identified as having archaeological potential. Should the results of the Stage II archaeological assessment warrant, a Stage III assessment shall be completed. These assessments must be conducted in accordance with the Ministry of Tourism, Culture and Sport’s Standards and Guidelines for Consultant Archaeologists (2011). If required, a Stage 2 Archaeological Assessment must be completed prior to the evaluation of alternative solutions. Stage I Archaeological Assessment is considered base scope and no additional payments are to be provided. Socio-Economic and Land Use Characteristics The Vendor shall determine the impact on socio-economic and land use characteristics in relation to the proposed Study and develop a mitigation strategy for any issues identified. The Vendor shall identify aesthetic effects and associated impacts of the Steeles Avenue road network and grade separation. The Vendor will identify the existing and designated land use planning components including, but not limited to: 1) Residential areas; 2) Commercial establishments; 3) Institutional areas; 4) Industrial operations; 5) Open Space areas (cemeteries, conservation areas and parks); and 6) Pedestrian and cycling access. Tree Inventory Plan and Arborist Report The Vendor shall review the Tree Inventory Plan and Arborist Reports completed from approved EAs Corridor Rail Service Expansion Environmental Study Report and reference findings as required. The Vendor shall develop a tree inventory and arborist report to identify and determine the impacts on all vegetation areas in relation to the proposed Study. The tree inventory plan and arborist report will include, but not be limited to: 1) The location, size, species, condition and category of all existing trees and vegetation; 2) Recommendations for tree/vegetation protection and preservation measures for all trees/vegetation that are to be retained and removal measures for all trees/vegetation to be removed; and, 3) Areas for suitable restoration/compensation that will identify site-specific impacts, mitigation and replacement measures to offset vegetation losses and to achieve a net gain in vegetation area to accurately reflect any potential loss. The report shall be developed by a certified arborist, based on guidelines, requirements and feedback provided by the Project Team. The Vendor shall submit one digital copy and three hard copies of the final tree inventory plan and arborist report to the City for its information and records.

86 of 112

Viewing Copy

Appendix I Watermain, Sanitary and Storm Water Servicing Maps

87 of 112

Viewing Copy

88 of 112

Viewing Copy

APPENDIX A.1 – GENERAL FUNCTIONAL DESIGN REQUIREMENTS MAY 2015 A.1 GENERAL FUNCTIONAL DESIGN REQUIREMENTS A.1.1 General

A.1.1.1

The requirements for engineering services to be provided by the Vendor to the City of Toronto for projects are as specified in the Request for Proposal and in the Appendices A.1 to A.4, inclusive. It is the responsibility of the Vendor to ascertain the full scope of the engineering services required for the project as they will be required to perform the work as specified. The Consultant shall become fully familiar and comply with the City's functional design requirements.

A.1.1.2

Wherever it is stated in the RFP, "engineering services" , it is intended that these services are inclusive of any and all professional services required in fulfillment of the functional design requirements.

A.1.2 City's Reviews

A.1.2.1

Where reference is made to submission of documents, designs, plans, etc., unless specified otherwise, they shall first be submitted in draft form to the City. A minimum of three weeks is required for City review and comment.

A.1.2.2

The Consultant shall provide a response to the City's comments indicating concurrence or non-concurrence, and if comments are not to be incorporated the Vendor shall indicate the reason for such.

A.1.2.3

Draft documents submitted for review shall be essentially complete, so as to allow for proper evaluation of material submitted. Any unfinished or missing sections or elements shall be clearly identified in the draft, and a brief description of the intended material is to be provided.

A.1.3 Document Management

A.1.3.1 General

a. A letter of transmittal should accompany all deliverables submitted to the City, both electronic and hard copy. The letter of transmittal shall list the various documents, and number of copies. All drawings must be submitted with the Digital File Submission Form, as included in the "Design & Construction - Linear Infrastructure CADD Specification Manual".

A.1.3.2 Electronic Document Management

a. When submitting draft or final reports, design documents, and other

deliverables, the consultant shall also provide one electronic copy on CD

89 of 112

Viewing Copy

for input to the City's electronic document management system. This must be provided at the same time as the paper copy. In order to be compatible with the City's technology platform, all electronic information must be provided such that it is compatible with one of the following platforms:

i. Microsoft Office Suite, version 2007 ii. Microsoft Project, version 2007 iii. Window XP iv. MicroStation V8 (Bentley) v. Adobe Reader, version 10.0

b. Prior to finalizing each submission, the consultant is to confirm the

City's preferred software package and version, for that submission. All CD/DVD's are to be properly labeled on the CD/DVD itself.

c. All files produced as a result of this project become the property of the City.

A.1.3.3 Record or As built Drawings

Submit electronic copy on CD/DVD of final Drawings and Specifications. The City will verify that the CADD files meet City standards. All drawings not meeting City standards will not be accepted, and must be re-issued at no additional cost to the City.

A.1.3.4 Hard Copies

a . Paper print versions of documents shall be submitted to the City as per the Summary of Deliverables (Section 3 of the RFP).

A.1.4 Standards

A.1.4.1 City of Toronto Standards

a. When fulfilling the project requirements, the Vendor is to ensure compliance with the following City of Toronto standards, unless specifically directed otherwise by the Project Manager:

i. Latest versions of "Engineering Survey Standards for

Consultants", "Engineering Survey Microstation V8 Graphic Specification" and "Design & Construction - Linear Infrastructure CADD Specification Manual". The Consultant shall note that topographic mapping, field edit, compiled area plan, and property surveys are collections of data from various sources, and may require verification in the field. This information requires proper editing and formatting by the Consultant in accordance with the City's standards before being used as a base plan.

ii.Latest version of the City of Toronto's "Standard Construction

Specifications & Drawings for Sewers, Watermains and Roads".

A.1.4.2 City of Toronto Requirements for Highway and Pedestrian Bridges, Retaining Walls, Barriers and Highway Accessory Supports of a Structural Nature.

a. Design highway structures in accordance with the Canadian Highway Bridge

Design Code and Ontario Ministry of Transportation "Structural Manual".

90 of 112

Viewing Copy

b. Design highway structures in accordance with the Ministry of Transportation "Geometric Design Standards for Ontario Highways" and Transportation Association of Canada "Geometric Design Guide for Canadian Roads".

A.1.4.3 Drawing Standards

a. Plan drawings shall conform to the requirements set forth in the City of

Toronto, Design & Construction - Linear Infrastructure CADD Specification Manual.

b. Drawings with colours shall be reproducible by all printing or duplication

media in black and white.

c. Except as may be modified or specified herein, or otherwise

approved by the City of Toronto, the collection and depiction of subsurface utility information shall conform to the applicable provisions of ASCE C-1 38-02, "Standard Guidelines" for the Collection and Depiction of Existing Subsurface Utility Data".

d. Drafting and lettering shall be of proper density and legibility for a 50%

reduction during reproduction.

e. The depiction of attributes such as line type, material type, age, condition, ownership, status (e.g. in-service, out-of-service, active, abandoned), number of conduits or direct buried cables, or other required information, shall not be eliminated, obliterated, or obscured by the manner of reproduction of by 50% reduction in size.

f. The Consultant shall replace, at no cost to the City of Toronto, plan sheets

that do not comply with the above criteria.

A.1.4.4 Other Guidelines & Standards

a. The Vendor shall use recognized industry design standards, guidelines, and best practices to establish the basic design data and design criteria. The design must meet the requirements of relevant codes and applicable legislation. The following list of selected statutes and codes is provided for guidance only:

Ontario Provincial standards for Roads and Public Works Navigable Water Act Environmental Protection Act, Ontario Health and Safety Act

A.1.5 Quality Assurance and Quality Control

A.1.5.1 General

a. The City requires the Vendor to exercise internal Quality Assurance (QA)

and Quality Control (QC) for the projects it executes for the City. This is to ensure that the project will be executed to the City's requirements and expectations.

b. Preference will be given to Vendor having QA/QC programs in place at

the time of Vendor selection.

91 of 112

Viewing Copy

A.1.5.2 QA Program

a. The Quality Assurance (QA) program that the City expects from the

Vendor includes all those planned and systematic actions required to ensure that the works that are to be constructed, will be designed in accordance with applicable codes, guidelines, standards and specifications.

b. Perform the following minimum standard in QA for the project to

ensure that the design work when completed has been reviewed and checked by senior staff from within the firm to ensure it has been performed in accordance with:

i. Good engineering practice ii. Constructability iii. Practical layout of equipment from an operation and maintenance

perspective iv. Relevant code(s) and standard(s) that the project must comply with v. The City's requirements as specified herein and in the Request for

Proposal vi. Other specific requirements to the project

A.1.5.3 QC Program

a. The Quality Control which the City requires the Vendor to provide for

projects, is the examination of the services provided and work done, together with management and documentation necessary to demonstrate that these services and works meet contractual and regulatory requirements.

b. The City requires engineering drawings produced by the Consultant

have been checked:

vii. For design errors viii. For drafting errors iii. To ensure proper co-ordination has been exercised

between the various engineering disciplines within the firm and those performed by sub-consultant(s)

iv. To ensure constructability c. That specifications produced by the Vendor have been checked for

completeness to ensure:

i. The City's legal and construction requirements are met ii. To ensure the City's standards for Tender Form, General

Conditions, Special Provisions etc. have been used. iii. That proper equipment has been specified iv. That the work in the various divisions in the specification are properly

co- ordinate v. That all the required approvals and permits have been specified vi. That all test procedures have been specified vii. That all codes and/or standards have been specified viii. That the Specifications are clear and concise

A.1.5.4 All reports, technical memoranda, drawings, and manuals, , both draft and

final copies must be reviewed and QA/QC completed by the consultant prior to submission by the City. The Vendor shall review the documents for the

92 of 112

Viewing Copy

items list above. The Vendor is to provide written and signed confirmation that QA/QC has been completed in accordance with the requirements list above. An example of confirmation is the "Vendor QAIQC" stamp shown below, this stamp would be applied to the front page of the document and signed by the appropriate staff prior to submission to the City. A document with no written and signed confirmation of QAIQC will not be reviewed and will be returned.

A.1.6 Health & Safety

A.1.7.1 General Requirements

a. The successful vendor is responsible for meeting the requirements of

the Occupational Health & Safety Act and City Health & Safety manual and the vendor is to review their safe work procedures with the City prior to undertaking any field work onsite.

b. The vendor's staff on-site during any phase of the project must be

knowledgeable of the governing safety regulations including, but not limited to, Industrial Regulations, Construction Regulations, Regulation Respecting Asbestos on Construction Projects and in Building Repair Operations, Diving Operations, Designated Substances, WHMIS, Workplace Safety & Insurance Act, Transportation of Dangerous Goods Act, Technical Standards & Safety Act, Highway Traffic Act, Fire Protection & Promotions Act, X-Ray Safety.

c. The vendor's staff on-site during any phase of the project must

possess written proof of competency such as appropriate training and experience in health and safety related activities applicable to the project (i.e. confined space entry, fall arrest, First Aid & CPR, Ladder & scaffolding training documentation, WHMIS training documentation, asbestos awareness and any other appropriate certificate required to be onsite).

d. WHMIS training, confined space awareness training, and 4-

hour asbestos awareness training, is mandatory for all consultant's staff present on-site during any phase of the project. The City may request proof of training at any time.

e. For facilities where specific site orientation and security protocol exist, the consultant's staff onsite during any phase of the project must attend a mandatory 2-hour health and safety orientation specific to the treatment

93 of 112

Viewing Copy

plant site before undertaking any work onsite. Staff must adhere to site security and emergency procedures at all times.

f. The successful vendor is responsible for providing all safety

equipment for the protection of their staff, including gas detection, safety retrieval devices, and any ancillary equipment for confined space entries (CSEs) required for inspection purposes. Certification in CSE is a pre-requisite and experience in the use of self-contained breathing apparatus is also a requirement.

g. A standard entry permit must be completed before any CSE's take place.

City staff will be available to allow access to the facilities only.

h. Prior to initiating any work onsite, the vendor must submit a letter on company letterhead, identifying that all personnel engaged in the assignment have had appropriate training in accordance with Section 1.7.1.d and 1.15.1.e. The letter must be signed and signed by personnel who have the authority to bind the corporation.

END OF APPENDIX A.1

94 of 112

Viewing Copy

APPENDIX A.3 – DATA COLLECTION MAY 2015 A.3 DATA COLLECTION

A.3.1 SUE

A.3.1.1 Unless specifically instructed in the Request for Proposal that subsurface utility engineering (SUE) investigations are not required, retain the services of a specialized firm that will conduct a SUE investigation to the quality level indicated in the RFP. The Vendor shall complete SUE C and D as described below.

The Vendor shall Prepare and submit a technical proposal on the recommended extent and quantity of SUE investigation for study area. The Vendor shall obtain all necessary permits from City of Toronto and/or local jurisdictions, as well as paying for all flagging and training requirements as per Metrolinx and CP requests. If works must be performed on private property, the Consultant shall obtain written permission from the property owner for ingress to their property, including names and telephone numbers of contact personnel should notification prior to entry be necessary.

SUE Quality Levels are defined as follows:

a. The scope of work to complete a Quality Level D, as a minimum must

address the following:

i. Records and Information Research -conduct appropriate investigation (e.g. Owner records, City of Toronto archival records, Toronto Public Utilities Coordinating Committee records, personal interviews, visual inspections, etc.) to help identify utility owners that may have facilities within the project limits or that may be affected by the project.

ii. Record Collection - collect applicable records (e.g. utility owner base maps, "as built" or record drawings, permit records, field notes, geographic information system data, oral histories, etc.) on the existence and approximate location of existing involved utilities.

iii. Records Review - review records for evidence or indication of additional available records. For duplicate or conflicting information, provide clarification.

iv. Identification of Aerial or Ground-Mounted Facilities - include records research, identification, and depiction of aerial or ground-mounted facilities in Quality Level 'D' tasks.

v. Compilation and Presentation of Data -transfer information on all involved utilities to appropriate plan sheets, electronic files, and/or other documents as required by the City of Toronto. Exercise professional judgment to resolve conflicting information. For information depicted, indicate; utility type and ownership; date of depiction; quality level (s); end points of any utility data; line status (e.g. active, abandoned, out of service); line size and condition; number of jointly buried cables; and encasement.

b. The scope of work to complete a Quality Level C shall include all tasks

from Level D and as a minimum must address the following additional tasks:

i. Identification of Surface Utility Features - identify surface features, from project topographic data (if available) and from field observations that are surface appurtenances of subsurface utilities.

95 of 112

Viewing Copy

ii. Identification of Aerial or Ground-Mounted Facilities- include survey and correlation of aerial or ground-mounted utility facilities in Quality Level C tasks.

iii. Utility Survey and Verifications - surveys of subsurface utility facilities or systems shall also include (in addition to subsurface utility features visible at the ground surface), determination of invert elevations of maintenance holes and vaults; sketches showing interior dimensions and line connections of such maintenance holes and vaults; any surface marking denoting subsurface utilities, furnished by utility owners for design purposes. Survey surface features of subsurface utility facilities or systems, if such features have not previously surveyed and carry out verification checks on previous survey data for accuracy and completeness.

iv. Confined Space Procedures- confined entry procedures (including but not limited to maintenance holes, vaults, and pipes, etc.), are to comply with City of Toronto applicable procedures and requirements contained within the City of Toronto, Health and Safety Policy.

v. Correlations, Interpretations and Presentation of Data Resolution of Discrepancies-exercise professional judgment to correlate data from different sources, and to resolve conflicting information. Update (or prepare) plan sheets, electronic files, and/or other documents to reflect the integration of Quality Level 'D' and Quality Level 'C' data. Recommend follow-up investigations (e.g., additional surveys, consultations with utility owners, etc.) as may be required to further resolve discrepancies and conflicts. As appropriate amend the indicated quality level of depicted information.

c. The scope of work to complete a Quality Level B shall include all tasks from

Level D through C and as a minimum must address the following additional tasks:

i. Line Detection and Marking - select/apply appropriate surface

geophysical method(s) to search for and detect subsurface utilities within the project limits, and/or to trace a particular utility line or system. In conjunction with the City of Toronto standards and based on an interpretation of data, mark the indications of utilities and label individual utility information on the ground surface, for subsequent survey. Unless otherwise directed, mark centerline of single conduit lines, and outside edges of multi-conduit systems. As an alternative to the physical marking of lines, the vendor may, with City of Toronto approval, utilize other means of data collection, storage, retrieval, and reduction, which enables the correlation of surface geophysical data to the projects survey control. SUE level B shall include the identification of all utilities within the stated project area, via toneable line and non-toneable line detection (including labour, market and survey) or via alternate geophysical method as proposed by the Vendor . As well SUE level B shall include measurements of all internal chamber dimensions as necessary.

ii. Survey - Survey all markings that indicate the presence of a subsurface utility.Perform surveys to a horizontal accuracy consistent with applicable City of Toronto survey standards. Reference surveys to the project's survey control. Record depth information of utility, which is indicated by the particular detection method, used. Clearly identify the means used to estimate depth, and the estimated level of accuracy.

iii. Correlations, Interpretations and Presentation of Data Resolution of Discrepancies - exercise professional judgment to correlate data from different sources and to resolve conflicting information. Update and/or prepare plan sheets, electronic files, and/or documents to reflect the integration of Quality Levels D, C, and B data.

96 of 112

Viewing Copy

Recommend follow-up investigations (e.g., additional surveys, consultation with utility owners, etc.) as may be needed to further resolve discrepancies. As appropriate, amend the indicated quality level of depicted information. The SUE survey shall be submitted in digital format in accordance with City Survey Standards, as well as, in a hard copy drawing format, stamped by a Professional Engineer licensed in Ontario

ix. Certified as to accuracy by a licensed Professional Engineer. All drawings and reports must be stamped and signed.

x. The Vendor shall submit a SUE B report shall as a minimum indentify any potential challenges that may be encountered during design that have been identified as a result of the data collection phase. Recommend locations where SUE Quality Level A investigations should be performed as a result of information collected while performing SUE Quality B investigations.

d. The scope of work to complete a Quality Level A shall include all tasks from Levels D through B and as a minimum must address the following additional tasks:

i. Selection of Test Locations- City of Toronto may require Quality Level

A data where the precise horizontal and vertical location of utilities, obtained by exposure and survey of the utility at specific points, is needed for conflict assessment and/or resolution purposes. The Vendor may recommend test locations based on the requirements of the project and on existing subsurface utility information.

ii. Selection of Method - The Consultant shall use minimally intrusive excavation techniques, acceptable to the City of Toronto, where utility lines must be exposed and surveyed at specific locations that ensure the safety of the excavation, the integrity of the utility line to be measured as well as other lines, which may be encountered during excavation. The Consultant will ensure excavation shall be by means of air or water assisted vacuum excavation equipment manufactured specifically for the purpose. No other means of mechanical excavation shall be allowed.

iii. Excavation of Test Holes- clean the test hole area of surface debris. In hard surface areas, neatly cut and remove existing surface, cut not to exceed 0.15 square meters unless otherwise approved. Excavate test hole by method(s) approved by the City of Toronto and to the applicable standards. The nominal diameter of the test hole shall not exceed 375 mm unless otherwise approved. Expose the utility only to the extent required for identification and data collection purposes. Avoid damage to lines, wrappings, coating, and cathodic protection or other protective coverings and features. Hand dig as needed to supplement the excavation and to ensure safety of personnel and buried plant. Revise test hole location as necessary to positively expose the utility.

iv. Collection, Recording and Presentation of Data - measure and/or record the following information on an appropriately formatted test hole data sheet that has been dated and professionally sealed by Consultant. Elevation at top and/or bottom of the utility tied to the project datum, to a vertical accuracy of +/-15mm. Elevation of existing grade over utility at test hole. Horizontal location of utility referenced to project coordinate datum, to a horizontal accuracy consistent with applicable City of Toronto survey requirements. Field sketch showing horizontal location referenced to a minimum of three (3) swing ties to physical structures existing in the field and shown on project plans. Approximate centerline bearing of utility lines. Nominal diameter of pipe, width of duct

97 of 112

Viewing Copy

banks and configuration of non-encased multi- conduit systems. Utility structure material composition, when reasonably ascertainable. Identity of benchmarks used to determine elevations. Ascertain and note condition of utility. Pavement thickness and type when applicable. Soil type and site conditions. Identity of utility owner/operator. Other pertinent information as is reasonably ascertainable from test hole.

v. Site Restoration - replace bedding material around exposed utility lines in conformance with owner's specifications or as otherwise directed or approved. Backfill and compact excavated material in accordance with City of Toronto requirements. Re-install color-coded warning ribbon within the backfill area and directly above the utility line. Supply/install permanent surface marker (e.g. P.K. nail, peg, steel pin, or hub) directly above the centerline of the structure or edge of structure for duct banks and record elevation of marker. Backfilling I surface restoration shall conform to the City of Toronto's Municipal Consent Requirements for the Installation of Plant within City of Toronto Streets.

vi. Interpretations of Data and Resolution of Discrepancies - provide professional expertise to correlate multi-sourced data and to resolve conflicting information. Update plan/profile sheets, electronic files, and/or other documents to reflect the integration of Quality Levels D, C, B and A data. Recommend follow-up investigations (e.g., additional surveys, consultation with utility owners, etc.) as may be needed to further resolve discrepancies. As appropriate, amend the indicated quality level of depicted information.

vii. Certified as to accuracy by a licensed Professional Engineer. All drawings and reports must be stamped and signed.

e. The SUE Quality Level performed for each utility must be indicated on plan

and/or profile engineering drawings.

f. Traffic Requirements

i. Traffic Management Plans must be prepared and implement, as approved by the City, whenever movement of traffic or traffic safety is impacted by the Consultant's operations. The Traffic Management Plan shall conform to the Ministry of Transportation- Ontario Traffic Manual Book 7.

ii. The Vendor shall also engage pay duty police, as required, for control of vehicular and pedestrian traffic. As a general guideline, pay duty police are required during any construction activity carried out within 30 metres of a signalised intersection, in signalized intersections when the left turn has been eliminated and/or turning movements cannot be made in a safe manner, at signalized intersections when pedestrian movements cannot be made safely due to the construction, or whenever there is a need to direct or stop two (2) lanes of traffic flowing in the same direction or opposite directions. Two (2) pay duty police officers shall be required to be present during the installation, relocation and/or removal of traffic control signs and delineators on any arterial roadway. Whenever towing services are required, a pay duty police officer must be present to direct and control this operation.

A.3.2 Engineering Survey (Not Applicable to Proponent – for information only)

A.3.2.1 The vendor will be required as part of the scope of work to perform a

complete Engineering Survey within the road allowance and area as specified in Section 3 of the RFP. The Vendor shall obtain all necessary permits from City of Toronto and/or local jurisdictions, as well as paying for all flagging requirements as per Metrolinx and CP requests. If works must be

98 of 112

Viewing Copy

performed on private property, the Consultant shall obtain written permission from the property owner for ingress to their property, including names and telephone numbers of contact personnel should notification prior to entry be necessary. At a minimum, the following will be information will be provided:

a. Confirm location and elevations of all curb, curb and gutter, sidewalks, driveways, bike paths, ditches, pavement markings and other road features

b. Confirm location of all utility surface features

c. Confirm location of all shrubs, planting beds, trees including species,

diameter of trunk, and drip line, and any other landscaping feature such as berms etc.

d. Confirm location and size of all bus shelters, benches, planters and other

street

furniture

e. Confirm invert elevations and sizes of all affected sewers and watermains

or

those that may cause conflicts, if applicable

f. Confirm top of lid elevations for all maintenance holes, catchbasins, valve chambers, valve boxes, and all other service structures

g. Confirm location and elevation of all fire hydrants

h. Confirm type, location and height of retaining walls and fences

i. Confirm surface materials (e.g. asphalt, concrete, pavers, sod, etc.)

j. Confirm location of all rail components and facilities if survey along the rail

corridor is specified k. Confirm location of all private property elements if survey within private

properties are specified. l. Any other surface features that may affect constructability or have a

significant impact on construction/restoration costs. The Engineering Survey shall be a full topographical survey with 0.005 of a

metre accuracy, from property line to property line for the entire length of the proposed assignment locations, including additional survey locations (private or public) as specified in Section 3 of the RFP. The Engineering Survey shall follow good survey practice such as obtaining elevations at least every 20 metres if a more stringent requirement is not indentified in Survey Standard (e.g. alignment changes, low points, etc.).The surveyors must have the capacity, both labour and experience, to provide engineering survey, as required for this program. The Party Chief must have at least five (5) years of related experience.

The Engineering Survey shall conform with the City's “Engineering Survey

Standards for Consultants” and “Engineering Survey Microstation V8 Graphic Specification” (City's Survey Standards) and shall indicate the appropriate CAD layers, symbols, and standard nomenclature, etc. that are to be used for all drawings. All costs borne by the City to correct or modify submitted drawings so that they conform to the survey standards shall be deducted from the overall Consultants fees of the assignment.

Upon acceptance of the Engineering Survey by the City, the Vendor shall

proceed with rationalizing the preliminary base plan with the engineering

99 of 112

Viewing Copy

survey. All base plan and design drawings must meet the requirements of the City's CADD Specification Manual.

Upon completion of the Engineering Survey and processing, the Vendor shall

complete a quality control, utilizing the City provided spec checker, to ensure compliance with the City Survey Standard and provide the City with a certificate of conformance (spec checker text log).

The Vendor shall provide an engineering survey package including the

following:

o GPS Raw Files;

o Transverse Report:

o 2 Dimension Drawings (.dgn);

o 3 Dimension Drawings (.dgn);

o Elevation Drawings (.dgn);

o Digital terrain Model (.dtm);

o Alignment File (.alg); and

o Utilities Depth Report (.xls).

A.3.3 Geotechnical Investigation

A.3.3.1 The Vendor will be required as part of the scope of work to conduct

geotechnical investigations and prepare reports for each of the proposed assignment locations.

The testing items listed below are considered base cost and shall include the cost of Professional Engineers, Technicians and Clerical staff and other labour required to complete the work as well as report writing, report submission, and recommendations.

The prices are to include mobilization, perform SPT and split spoon sampling, prepare borehole log, soil classification and record water table at the end of drilling to the depths specified in Section 3 of the RFP. The Vendor shall obtain all necessary permits from City of Toronto and/or local jurisdictions, as well as paying for all flagging requirements and training as per Metrolinx and CP requests. If works must be performed on private property, the Consultant shall obtain written permission from the property owner for ingress to their property, including names and telephone numbers of contact personnel should notification prior to entry be necessary.

The Vender shall:

Prepare borehole plans for each assignment location, obtain

permits as required for soil investigations, co-ordinate and perform/supervise soil environmental investigation activities in the field and incorporate all necessary soil and disposal practices and procedures required by the regulatory agencies into the Geotechnical report.

submit geotechnical technical proposals for each assignment for review by the City's Project Manager prior to proceeding with any geotechnical field works. The field works shall commence as soon as possible after receipt of notification of acceptance of the geotechnical proposal for each assignment and complete the work within the time indicated in the submitted proposal.

100 of 112

Viewing Copy

select the location of boreholes to avoid conflict with above or underground utilities, distribute boreholes evenly across the entire length of the assignment location, and cover all the traveled lanes.

The Vendor shall provide a Geotechnical Investigation Report, providing

recommendations to address the following:

a. Pipe bedding (materials) requirements with respect to City's standards;

b. Dewatering requirements describing available methods including well points, if required;

c. Recommendations relative to bedrock blasting and removal, if required;

d. Recommendations for open cut trench excavation, type of shoring system, methods of tunneling, or jacking and boring;

e. Recommendations on the use of native backfill, placement depth of layers, and compaction specification for same;

f. Recommendations for soil parameters to be used for calculation of trust blocks and restrained joints (including coefficient of friction, shear angle, and bearing capacity);

g. Concerns in relation to trench bottom uplift; and

h. Recommendations on the disposal of the material off site based on the outcome of the chemical analysis of the soil.

All findings from the geotechnical investigation, including borehole log report, chemical analyses results, comments and recommendations should be presented in an assignment by assignment or assignment grouping report format. Recommendations shall include a cost effective life cycle pavement design based on the City's Pavement Structural Design Guideline and suitability of materials for backfilling purposes. Traffic volumes (AADT) required for the pavement design will be supplied by the City.

For each geotechnical investigation, the Consultant shall submit to the City's Project Manager two (2) separate reports, a factual report and a recommendations report. The Consultant to confirm the activities related to boreholes and boreholes preparation confirm with OHSA requirements, including but not limited to, how it pertains to the requirement of the Constructor

The Vendor will be responsible for all asbestos testing, classification of subsoil, water table monitoring, chemical analyses of in-situ soils to determine excavated soil disposal requirements, suitability as fill material and necessary engineering properties that may have an impact on design and construction of the alternative solutions and as a minimum comply with the following requirements:

a. General Requirements for Each Borehole

i. Supply all labour, equipment and materials, necessary to complete the

soil borings, including packaging and delivery of samples and submission of reports as specified herein.

ii. Arrange for stake out of all underground utilities and obtain the necessary road occupancy permits prior to commencing work.

iii. Continuously employ not less than three workers on any one boring machine, including a drilling foreman experienced in both soil and rock drilling and sampling, an assistant, and a flag person to

101 of 112

Viewing Copy

direct traffic. Vendor shall provide his own technician with the appropriate experience in field supervision and sample preparation.

iv. The final location of each borehole should be reported in the borehole log with reference to an easily identifiable object on the street, such as house number or measurement from the nearest road intersection. The location of the borehole should also make reference to which travelled lane of a roadway the borehole is situated. Furthermore, the Vendor shall prepare a key plan as part of the geotechnical investigation report for each assignment location and include three tie- in measurements per borehole from permanent structures in the vicinity, with offset from curb lines.

v. In the event that bedrock is encountered, continue the borehole into the bedrock for a depth of 3 metres

vi. Designated substance testing must be carried out as part of the geotechnical Investigation and findings must be identified in the report.

vii. Vendor shall perform the Standard Penetration Resistance test to determine and record the number of blows, of a 65 kg hammer, falling 760 mm, required to drive a 50 mm diameter split spoon sampler 300 mm into the material. Do this for every 750 mm of depth and near the top of each layer of new material. Record the relative elevation of the above tests.

viii. Vendor to note and log the type of soil at various levels from the datum provided by the City's Project Manager, to the depth of the borehole, or from road/ground surface as specified. Take the first sample before the hole is 250 mm deep, and the second sample between 250 mm and 1000 mm depth. Thereafter take samples with a sampling spoon of approved type, every 750 mm, and at every level where there is a change in character of the soil. Immediately upon removal from the hole, samples shall be tightly sealed in air tight containers, to be supplied by the Consultant. Take care to ensure all fine materials are retained and that materials are well mixed and truly representative of the soils to be encountered during construction. Assemble samples separately for each hole, and label to give a complete record of each boring, including names of assignments, order number, hole number and depth at which the sample was taken.

ix. Asphaltic Concrete test shall be completed including: o Coring samples from asphalt flexible pavement or

concrete composite pavement for asbestos investigation and analysis, and backfill core holes with hot mix asphalt and compact with hand held Marshall compaction hammer

o Asbestos Analysis including the complete preparation and analysis, such as extraction of washed samples, laboratory tests, including all associated expenses (O. Reg. 278/05)

Asphalt cores shall be analyzed to determine asbestos content as per O. Reg. 278/05 utilizing the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Test Method EPA/600/R-93/116: Method for the Determination of Asbestos in Bulk Building Materials (June 1993). Asbestos analysis shall be done on a composite of all asphalt layers found in a core sample. For purpose of pricing, assume 3 layers of asphalt. Payment for asbestos analysis shall be the same for each asbestos analysis completed, whether it is for a single layer of asphalt or for a composite of 1 to 4 or more layers. Asbestos concentrations shall be reported as a percent by weight to less than 0.25% asbestos content and shall include an indication of the asbestos fibre type. Asbestos fibre analysis shall be done using polarized light microscopy (PLM). Asbestos fibre analysis method shall be based on EPA 600 or approved equivalent.

x. Aggregate and Soils test

102 of 112

Viewing Copy

o Perform sieve analysis with wash in accordance with MTO procedure (TS 1010)

o Perform standard Proctor test (ASTM D698) xi. Moisture Content Test (ASTM D2974) including the Installation, supply

and decommissioning of piezometer in sufficient number of bore holes to depict the hydro-geological profile of the study area. Piezometers are to be installed in boreholes that are not dry upon completion of drilling. Water inside a borehole should be pumped out before a piezometer is installed prior to backfilling. The Vendor is responsible disposing of the surplus water. The Vendor should return to the site to record the free standing ground water level inside the borehole after 24 hours. Each piezometer assembly shall include a proper piezometer tip, an appropriate length plastic tubing of 12.7 mm outside diameter, couplings, and protective plastic caps.

xii Pavement investigations to address the permeability of the sub-grade materials are to be performed to facilitate drainage design. The permeability of the sub-grade shall be estimated by comparing the particle size distribution of the material with the established permeability correlation data. Combined sieve and hydrometer analyses shall be carried out on representative samples of the sub-grade material(s) to obtain the particle size distribution curves for comparison.

xiii. During the field investigation works, Vendor is to provide, erect and maintain all requisite barriers and fences, or build proper protection, provide, keep and maintain watchperson and warning lights as specified by the City of Toronto, to ensure safety to the public as well as those engaged on or about the work, without further order or expense.

xiv. Upon completion of the works, remove all piping, temporary structures, garbage and waste materials and restore ground surface to its previous conditions. Refill each borehole immediately after its completion, with cement grout (1:3 cement sand mortar mixed dry and tamped in). Test pits to be backfilled in accordance with City Standard TS 4.60: Construction Specification for Utility Cut and Restoration. Restoration must be satisfactory to the City.

b. Traffic Requirements

i. The placement of signs, flashers and channelling methods for the

guidance and protection of pedestrian and vehicular traffic must conform to the latest Ontario Traffic Manual Book 7: Temporary Conditions.

ii. Materials and equipment must be confined to one side of the street only and stored so as not to interfere with visibility and/or comer movements.

iii. Sidewalks must not be totally obstructed at any time. However, if sidewalks must be blocked, pedestrians shall be directed to the other sidewalk on the opposite side of the road with proper signage.

iv. Satisfactory facilities for pedestrians crossing at comers must be provided.

xi. Provide flag persons to guide pedestrians and vehicular traffic when required.

xii. Maintain access to all streets at all times. vii. Comply with conditions of the Road Occupancy Permits such as

meeting with the Work Zone Traffic Coordinator when required and issue RODARS lane restriction notifications.

viii. As a general guideline, pay duty police are required during any construction activity carried out within 30 metres of a signalized intersection, in signalised intersections when the left turn has been eliminated and/or turning movements cannot be made in a safe manner, at signalized intersections when pedestrian movements cannot be made safely due to the construction, or whenever there is a need to direct or stop two (2) lanes of traffic flowing in the same direction or

103 of 112

Viewing Copy

opposite directions. Two (2) pay duty police officers shall be required to be present during the installation, relocation and/or removal of traffic control signs and delineators on any arterial roadway. Whenever towing services are required, a pay duty police officer must be present to direct and control this operation.

c. Borehole Log Report

All sample descriptions in the report shall follow the Canadian Foundations Engineering Manual soil classification system. The borehole log report, among other relevant information, shall include the following:

i. Project description, location, date and time of test and drill type. ii. Detail description of the types of soil encountered, their soil

classifications and depths and delineate soil stratigraphy in accordance with the Ministry of Transportation of Ontario's Soil Classification System.

iii. Record the thickness of asphalt and/or concrete and granular road base in the borehole log report, where boreholes are located within an asphalt or concrete roadway.

iv. Describe colour, consistency and or wetness of soil. v. Make specific note of soil colour stains, odours where present and any

metal, wood, debris or organic materials encountered. Record any observations that indicate contamination of excavated material with petroleum products, garbage or other wastes.

vi. Record N values from Standard Penetration Tests and penetration depth of split spoon sampler.

vii. Record ground water and free standing water table in the borehole upon completion of boring and after 24 hours.

viii. Report cave-in depth if cave-in occurs. ix. Describe the type and hardness of bedrock if encountered.

d. Soil Chemical Analysis

i. Consult with MOECC or TRCA staff and develop a work program to analyze and classify the material, which is intended for excavation during construction. The proposed work program must be satisfactory to MOECC or TRCA staff. The work program may include only analysis of existing soil samples and/or collection and analysis of additional soil samples as considered appropriate to the site and project at hand.

ii. Conduct sufficient laboratory analysis to classify soil samples for disposal options in accordance with ILQCP and MOECC guidelines, including but not limited to: 1) phytotoxicological analysis of soil sample including metals and inorganics for each borehole sample collected, 2) Ontario Reg. 588 (TCLP – inorganic) Leachate Quality Analysis, including classification for disposal under Ontario Reg. 558, Schedule 4 for every four borehole samples taken (with a minimum of one testing completed per location). As well, based on site observations and recommendations from the Vendor's geotechnical and soil experts, testing shall include analysis of soil sample – PCB's , BTEC &PHC's , and VOC's (O.Reg. 558). The mentioned analysis shall be considered base cost and shall include comparison to MOE's Guideline for use at Contaminated Sites in Ontario, Revised February, 1997" and the corresponding soil land use criteria as outlined in the Soil, Ground Wter and Sediment Standards for Use Under Part XV.1 of the Environmental Protection Act, MOE April 15, 2011.

iii. Prepare a final report outlining the work program undertaken; test results; and commenting on the suitability of excavated material for landfill disposal. Where test results indicate that the material will not

104 of 112

Viewing Copy

be suitable for lakefill (Leslie St), include alternative landfill disposal options consistent with Ontario Regulations 558 and MOECC guidelines for disposal at a licensed landfill.

e. Infiltration Test

i. If required, in situ infiltration tests are to be performed in a separate 5.00 metre deep borehole by inserting a perforated casing with the top 1.5 m perforations being blocked off. Fill the hole with water and measure the time required for the water to infiltrate into the soil.

ii. Soil percolation rates are to be measured in each borehole. Soil percolation rates are to be measured in the depth range of approx. 1.2m to 3.5m. Infiltration testing shall be done to assess suitability of area for pervious catch basins. Recommendations are to be provided concerning suitability of soils for infiltration as per MOECC guidelines.

END OF APPENDIX A.3

105 of 112

Viewing Copy

APPENDIX A.4 – FUNCTIONAL DESIGN ENGINEERING SERVICES MAY 2015 A.4 FUNCTIONAL DESIGN ENGINEERING SERVICES

A.4.1 General

A.4.1.1 Existing Documents and Record Drawings

a. The Vendor shall record its findings and advise the Project Manager of any significant changes or omissions in the record drawings.

b. Any redesign work required due to the Vendor's failure to review

documents or record drawings will be at the Vendor's own cost.

c. Review scope of current projects and identify potential impacts on the project. Ensure that any potential impacts/conflicts are identified and discussed with the City's project team.

A.4.1.2 Meetings

a. Refer to Section 3 of the RFP for details regarding project meetings.

A.4.2 Field and Data Collection Reviews

A.4.2.1 Existing Conditions and Utilities

a. Review Data Collection investigations completed (i.e. SUE, Survey,

Geotechnical Analysis, Soil Chemical Analysis, etc…) and visit the site as required to determine existing conditions, locations, services, features, connections, routes, access, interference, etc., related to the proposed design.

b. Submit plans to utility companies to obtain locations of all below

and aboveground utilities.

c. Develop an approach to ensure that critical utilities are maintained

during construction. Where necessary, coordinate and arrange to expose if accurate location is critical for design purposes. Cost to expose will be borne by the City.

A.4.3 Review of the Preferred Alternative Design Concept

A.4.3.1 Building upon investigation works completed for Phase 2 and 3 of the Municipal Class Environmental Assessment process, as outlined in Section 3 of the RFP, the Vendor shall prepare a review of design alternatives to support the design of the selected Preferred Alterative Design Concept and summarize in a report, which will provide the foundation for the functional design phase. Submit a report outline to the City for approval prior to commencement of the review.

A.4.3.2 The report shall outline project specific design options, provide an analysis

of these options, and include a recommendation of the preferred design option. The analysis shall be based on the technical information, prepared

106 of 112

Viewing Copy

by the Vendor prior to commencement of the functional design, and on the input from the City. The analysis of options shall include, but not limited to the following:

a. Cost of ownership including annual fixed/amortized costs

b. Land requirements

c. Impact on future and current land use

d. Operational and maintenance costs

e. Operational issues and concerns

f. Site constraints including functional traffic staging (staging & detour plans),

utility relocation requirements, Soil remediation strategies, etc…

g. Design and construction schedule

h. Constructability challenges

A.4.3.3 The review shall document the process with sufficient level of detail to support the City's decision on proceeding with the selected option.The final scheme of traffic control and construction stagin must be developed in consultation with the City's Traffic Operations Section and Engineering and Construction Services Dvision.

A.4.3.4 In general, the report shall include technical memoranda, test results of pilot testing, notes of meetings, and copies of relevant correspondence with the project stakeholders.

A.4.3.5 The review of the Preferred Alternative Design Concept and the functional design report, as defined Appendix A.4, may be combined in one document.

A.4.4 Functional Design Report

A.4.4.1 General

a. Prepare a comprehensive functional design report, which will provide the

basis and details for the final detailed design and construction of the proposed facilities. Submit a report outline to the City for approval prior to commencement of the report.

b. The final functional design report must be signed and stamped by a

Professional Engineer licensed in Ontario.

c. Upon approval of the functionaldesign report by the City, changes will not be permitted unless authorized in writing by the City's Project Manager.

A.4.4.2 The scope of the functional design report shall be project specific. In

general, the report shall include the following sections

a. Project Description

i. Background

107 of 112

Viewing Copy

ii. Objectives iii. Design criteria and assumptions to be used in the design and design intent

b. Plan and Profile Drawings

i. Preliminary plan and profile including: Existing soils information Land to be acquired, if applicable Functional traffic staging plan ( staging and detour) Statements/drawings showing the design concept(s)

ii. Include reduced drawings (11x17) with the functional design report and full size drawings for record keeping

c. Mitigating measures

i. Proposed mitigating measures reducing impact on natural, economic, and community environment, such as noise

attenuation, air emission reduction, and visual aesthetics

d. Basic Design Data

i. Basic design data as required by the MOE Certificate of Approval Complete preliminary process design calculations, as required,

using existing available system data

e. Cost Estimates

i. Prepare construction cost estimate using preliminary quantity surveys and current unit prices within ±25% accuracy, including cost associated with utility relocation, soil remediation, property acquisition, staging & detour costs.

ii. Identify cost of new works ii. Identify cost of renovation works impacted by construction

works because of changes to the various codes or legislation iii. Include all work sheets of quantity take-off iv. Include equipment pre-purchased by the City (valves, pipes, etc.) v. A life cycle cost for the preferred functional design including the

following as it applies:

Acquisition costs, including land purchases or easements;

Construction, installation and commissioning costs;

Operating costs or annual cost for energy consumption;

Maintenance costs including corrective, preventive and predictive;

Disposal costs.

A life span of 50 years must be considered.

f. Schedule

i. Prepare a preliminary schedule for final design, construction, and post-construction services of the project. Incorporate reasonable timelines into the schedule, addressing approvals requirements and City of Toronto Council award requirements

108 of 112

Viewing Copy

ii. Preliminary schedule shall include a Staging and Detour plan to

illustrate phases required to maintain all modes of traffic during construction.

A.4.4.3 The following provides additional project specific requirements study involving the following components: watermain, sewer, road, bridge, and rail. The list is not to be considered exhaustive.

a. Watermain

1. Drawing sheets to be established in plan & profile with all existing

information including utilities. (Ensure information from Utility Circulation & Survey is incorporated, Identify and show size and material of existing mains, water services and valve chambers and show fire hydrants).

2. Complete Surround (title block), Show Property Lines, Street names, Chainage/Stationing, North Arrow, Key Plans.

3. Identify project limits on plan. 4. Identify borehole information on plan. 5. Analyze horizontal alignment based on 5 watermain design criteria

choices. 6. Preliminary horizontal alignment to be established with 1 or 2

alternatives. 7. Confirm Property Requirements have been satisfied (i.e.widenings,

easements, etc…). 8. Identify any conflicts with Utilities and confirm any utility relocation

plans. 9. Make Initial submission to Approval agencies for comments (i.e.

MOE, TRCA, MTO, CPR, CNR, Pipeline Crossing permits, etc…). 10. Final horizontal alignment determined. 11. Preliminary vertical alignment established. 12. Confirm alignment (horizontal and vertical) meets design criteria

b. Sewer ( Sanitary and Storm)

1. Drawing sheets to be established in plan & profile with all existing

information including utilities. (Ensure information from Utility Circulation & Survey is incorporated, Identify and show size and material of existing mains, service connections (i.e. leads), manhole and Catch basin chambers).

2. Complete Surround (title block), Show Property Lines, Street names, Chainage/Stationing, North Arrow, Key Plans.

3. Identify project limits on plan. 4. Identify borehole information on plan. 5. Preliminary horizontal alignment to be established with 1 or 2

alternatives. 6. Confirm Property Requirements have been satisfied (i.e.widenings,

easements, etc…). 7. Identify any conflicts with Utilities and confirm any utility relocation

plans. 8. Stormwater management review (quantity and quality) and

identification of drainage area 9. Sanitary servicing requirements 10. Make Initial submission to Approval agencies for comments (i.e.

MOE, TRCA, MTO, 11. CPR, CNR, Pipeline Crossing permits, etc…).

109 of 112

Viewing Copy

12. Final horizontal alignment determined. 13. Preliminary vertical alignment established. 14. Confirm alignment (horizontal and vertical) meets design criteria

c. Road

1. Drawing sheets to be established in plan & profile with all existing information including utilities. (Ensure information from Utility Circulation & Survey is incorporated).

2. Complete Surround (title block), Show Property Lines, Street names, 3. Chainage/Stationing, North Arrow, Key Plans. 4. Identify project limits on plan. 5. Identify borehole information on plan. 6. Preliminary horizontal alignment to be established 7. Confirm Property Requirements have been satisfied (i.e.widenings,

easements, etc…). 8. Identify any conflicts with Utilities and confirm any utility relocation

plans. 9. Make Initial submission to Approval agencies for comments (i.e.

MOE, TRCA, MTO, 10. CPR, CNR, Pipeline Crossing permits, etc…). 11. Final horizontal alignment determined for all road, cycling, sidewalk,

boulevard, surface utilities, traffic signals, signage, pavement markings, and streetscape components. Design includes consideration for AODA requirements and illustration of typical cross sections to denote width of road, sidewalk, cycling boulevard, utility, and streetscape elements.

12. Preliminary vertical alignment established. 13. Confirm alignment (horizontal and vertical) meets design criteria 14. Prepare a land acquisition plan including summary of details

(dimensions, areas and property owners together with temporary and permanent easement requirements) along with market value cost.

15. Review traffic impacts and safety concerns with any water, rail or road crossings.

16. Assess and recommend alternatives with regards to the new bridge structures at any water, rail or road separations.

17. Review and assess provisions for new pedestrian and cycling infrastructure in consultation with staff from Transportation Services.

18. Review and recommend stormwater management per the context of stormwater guidelines and in consultation with staff from Toronto Water.

19. Determine and assess any proposed development/access within project boundary and in consultation with staff from Development Engineering.

d. Bridge

1. Drawing sheets to be established in plan & profile with all existing

information including utilities. (Ensure information from Utility Circulation & Survey is incorporated).

2. Complete Surround (title block), Show Property Lines, Street names, 3. Chainage/Stationing, North Arrow, Key Plans. 4. Identify project limits on plan. 5. Identify borehole information on plan. 6. Preliminary horizontal alignment to be established

110 of 112

Viewing Copy

7. Confirm Property Requirements have been satisfied (i.e.widenings, easements, etc…).

8. Identify any conflicts with Utilities and confirm any utility relocation plans.

9. Complete functional design drawings of Bridge. At a minimum, provide general arrangement drawings, traffic staging drawings, layout drawings of foundations, substructure, girders, roadway, rail tracks, elevated pedestrian crossing (if required) and retaining walls including foundation and substructure type, sizing of girders. Drawings shall illustrate proposed road geometry and required clearances,

10. Make Initial submission to Approval agencies for comments (i.e. MOE, TRCA, MTO,

11. CPR, CNR, Pipeline Crossing permits, etc…). 12. Final horizontal alignment determined. 13. Preliminary vertical alignment established. 14. Confirm alignment (horizontal and vertical) meets design criteria 15. Prepare a land acquisition plan including summary of details

((dimensions, areas and property owners together with temporary and permanent easement requirements) along with market value cost.

16. Review traffic impacts and safety concerns with any water, rail or road crossings.

17. Review and assess provisions for new pedestrian and cycling infrastructure in consultation with staff from Transportation Services.

18. Review and recommend stormwater management per the context of stormwater guidelines and in consultation with staff from Toronto Water.

19. Determine and assess any proposed development/access within project boundary and in consultation with staff from Development Engineering. This requires a constructability feasibility review.

e. Rail

1. Complete functional design drawings (Plan and Profile) for rail and bridge structure elements, including but not limited to: major access points, rail tracks, electrical elements, signals, landscape, paving,

2. Renderings, conceptual and site plans, for rail and bridge structure elements, including but not limited to: major access points, rail tracks, electrical elements, signals, landscape, paving,

A.4.5 Deliverables

A.4.5.1 The following provides a list of deliverables upon completion of the functional design. The Vendor shall note that the RFP may contain additional project specific deliverables or delete some accordingly.

a. Review of Design Alternatives

b. First draft Functional Design Report

c. Second draft Functional Report

d. Final Functional Designe Report

111 of 112

Viewing Copy

Report complete with design calculation and drawings in conformance with "Design & Construction- Linear Infrastructure CADD Specification Manual".

END OF APPENDIX A.4

112 of 112

Viewing Copy