Bloor Danforth Bikeway RFP for EA

1,290 views
1,235 views

Published on

0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total views
1,290
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
0
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
8
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Bloor Danforth Bikeway RFP for EA

  1. 1. Request for Proposal Call number: 9121-10-7031 Commodity: Professional Services, Consulting services Description: Bloor Street / Danforth Avenue Bikeway Class Environmental Assessment Study Bloor Street / Danforth Avenue Bikeway Class Environmental Assessment Study Issue date: January 27, 2010 Closing date: March 1, 2010 at 12:00 Noon Buyer: Petrovic, Tanya Phone number: 416-397-4806 Email: tpetrov@toronto.ca Location: City Hall, 19th Floor West Tower Client Division: Transportation Services Non-refundable document fee: $25.00 Scope of work: Study Design The first step in the study will be the preparation of a study design (Study Design). This document will be a refinement of the Proposal submitted in response to this RFP. The Study Design will define in detail the scope and work schedule of the study and will form the basis for the Agreement between the City of Toronto and the Vendor, if required. A Technical Advisory Committee (TAC), the membership of which is described in Section 3.10 of this document, will review the Study Design. The Vendor should allow for two iterations of the Study Design before it is finalized. Data Collection A listing of the data that will be provided by the City is included in Section 3.11 of this document. The Vendor will be responsible for the collection, organization, documentation and interpretation of appropriate data including, but not limited to: Background Information i) Review of all relevant background materials and studies, including relevant transportation policies contained in Official Plans, Secondary Plans, Avenue Studies, etc; ii) Review approved and planned future development in the primary study area; and, iii) Review of all studies being undertaken along the primary study area that may impact the design or location of the bikeway. Physical Environment i) Summary of the impact of approved and planned future development in the primary study area, including any transportation-related improvements required as a condition of development approvals; ii) Inventory of existing conditions (physical, social, natural and economic environments) along the corridor including affected private property and existing infrastructure; iii) Contact with relevant utilities to obtain location of existing and future plants; iv) Confirmation of validity of all mapping and structural plans;
  2. 2. v) Geotechnical/Engineering data for the affected area, as required; vi) Inventory of existing heritage features and surrounding cultural landscape. vii) Inventory of available on street parking and off-street Toronto Parking Authority parking along the primary study area, an inventory of other off-street parking facilities along the primary study corridor may also be required; viii) Inventory of bicycle parking facilities along the primary study area including at subway stations; ix) ROW mapping illustrating existing and Official Plan ROW limits; and x) Existing and proposed street designs, at critical intersections or road segments, illustrating proposed major changes (i.e. elimination of turning facilities etc.). Operating Environment i) The City of Toronto will provide the most recent automobile traffic counts for the study area as identified, additional data may be required to fully determine impacts on adjacent streets. Where available pedestrian volumes will be provided; ii) Collect comprehensive data enumerating cyclist volumes throughout the study corridor. Seasonal variation in cycling volumes should also be summarized; iii) Transit routing and volumes (where appropriate); iv) The City of Toronto will provide current traffic signal timings; v) Further the Vendor will need to document and evaluate the relative importance of on-street parking and motor vehicle capacity to the character and vitality of the communities and Business Improvement Areas along the corridor, with the aim to better understanding the role and function of the corridor, and significance of reduction of parking supply and/or motor vehicle capacity. As such, consideration may be given to undertaking surveys of business patrons and or drivers in the corridor to arrive at this understanding. These could include: o a pedestrian intercept survey to determine how patrons access the businesses on the street, the nature of their activity on the street, frequency of visits, and how much money they spend; and o merchant surveys to gauge their perceptions about the importance of parking and traffic capacity to the vitality of their business in particular and to the street in general. vi) The City of Toronto will provide available parking data for Toronto Parking Authority facilities along the primary study area. Parking utilization surveys may be required to verify the pay-and- display parking data, and may be needed to supplement the available data to determine the current parking usage and patterns along the corridor, for both on-street parking and parking in adjacent off-street parking facilities. vii) Commercial loading needs/activity will need to be documented. Sections where there is no opportunity for commercial deliveries off-street (i.e. in a rear lane or driveway) will need to be identified. vii) Collect comprehensive data enumerating bicycle parking activity along the primary study area. vi) The Vendor will contact other relevant external organizations to establish existing service and future plans, including but not limited to, the Toronto Transit Commission (TTC), GO Transit; and the Toronto Parking Authority; vii) The City will make available the last three years of collision information for the study area as identified. The City will not release any information that contravenes the Freedom of Information and Privacy Act. The analysis of collision information should be in sufficient detail to identify any
  3. 3. safety or operational concerns involving pedestrians, cyclists TTC and motor vehicle operations; viii) The City of Toronto has the ability to provide traffic data from its EMME2/model in the form of a percentage change in volume from a 2001 base year to a future year. However, this is limited only to the A.M. peak hour. ix) 5 and 10 year capital works program. The Vendor should clearly identify in the proposal the data and data collection methods necessary to complete this assignment. The Vendor should bear in mind that the pedestrian and transit activity (where appropriate) along the study corridor may require additional data collection outside of the data collected by the City. The Vendor should also bear in mind that the absence of existing bicycle facilities on-street has an impact on the existing cyclist volume data in these areas. Locations where bicycle counts are recorded, the time of year and accompanying weather conditions have also been shown to directly affect the outcome of cyclist volume data. These factors must be considered when conducting additional counts and observations as well as during the analysis of readily available data Data Analysis The City recognizes that in achieving the objective of an optimal bikeway design for the Bloor- Danforth corridor, it may not be feasible to maintain existing motor vehicle or parking capacity through the corridor. However, the traffic analysis requirement as part of the study, is not to establish road infrastructure improvements to increase or maintain auto capacity, but to identify potential problem areas and develop mitigating measures, to the extent possible, prior to project implementation. The Vendor will be responsible for: i) Identifying existing automobile traffic, pedestrian and cyclist traffic operations and safety concerns along the primary study area; ii) Forecasting future automobile traffic demands and patterns based on known development and supportable estimates of background traffic growth along the primary study area; iii) Providing supportable estimates of future bicycle traffic demands and patterns along the corridor expected to result from a continuous bikeway facility based on: examples of growth in bicycle traffic along the corridor and elsewhere in the study area where bicycle facilities have already been provided; known development; and future growth targets; iv) Identifying any future automobile traffic operations impacts within the primary study area as a result of the options under study, and identify measures to mitigate these to the extent possible; v) Identifying any future automobile parking and on-street loading impacts within the primary study area as a result of the options under study,; vi) Identify options for a parking replacement strategy in association with the Toronto Parking Authority and local BIA’s to mitigate potential parking impacts; vii) Evaluate the economic impact on businesses resulting from any reduction/change in available parking/loading ability and any expected economic effects to businesses resulting from changes in person capacity that may result from accommodating bicycle traffic along the corridor; viii) Evaluate any network wide implications within the secondary study area from a potential automobile capacity reduction along the Bloor Street and Danforth Avenue that may be necessary to achieve the optimal bikeway design, using City approved parameters and assumptions; ix) Conducting existing and future intersection capacity analysis using Synchro/SimTraffic software. Analysis parameters shall reflect the City of Toronto’s “Guidelines for Using Synchro Software”; x) Confirming the validity of all mapping; and, xi) Submission of a Stage I Archaeological Assessment, in compliance with the Ministry of Culture’s Archaeological Assessment Technical Guidelines dated 1993, on the subject property to
  4. 4. support determinations of archaeological potential and recommendations for further assessment. The cost of a Stage II Archaeological Assessment should be identified as an optional additional cost. The Vendor should confirm the data analysis requirements in the proposal, including the rationale for selecting specific techniques and any additional requirements to those listed above. Both the primary and secondary study areas are quite large. The Vendor should identify the traffic modelling methodology to be used to assist in the network evaluation, including software packages to be used. Problem Statement and Needs Assessment A clear problem and/or opportunity statement will be developed to establish the need and justification for undertaking any physical modifications as well as the magnitude of such modifications. Technical Memo No. 1 will be prepared at this point summarizing the existing conditions and problem and/or opportunity statement before the first Public Information Centre (PIC #1). Identification and Evaluation of Alternative Solutions The corridor under study is approximately 24 kilometers long, varies in existing cross-section and right-of-way, and traverses various land use areas including residential and commercial zones. As such, the method of achieving a continuous bikeway may not necessarily be the same for the entire corridor. The Vendor will be expected to apply their knowledge of emerging international best practices regarding bikeway design to develop innovative design approaches for providing a continuous bikeway while, to the extent possible, balancing other needs along the corridor. From a cycling perspective the optimum on-street facility for cyclists is a dedicated physically separated bicycle lane; which provides a higher degree of safety and comfort for cyclists, followed by a traditional on-street dedicated facility. Other on-street bicycle facilities include marked shared lanes (marked with road signs and/or with sharrow pavement markings) that have wider than normal curb lanes, which provide more space for bicycles and automobiles to share the lane. Where physically separated bicycle lanes are feasible, alternatives may also consider placing both bicycle lanes on one side of the road. Consideration should also be given to intersection design as the different alternatives may require innovative solutions for enhancing safety at intersections with minor and major roads and driveways. Due to the various land uses along the corridor it is suggested that the task be divided in such a manner as to determine the best method of achieving a continuous bikeway along the length of the corridor. One method is to divide the corridor by ease of implementation, based upon the existing road cross-section or right-of-way, assigning a phased approach and developing time lines in conjunction with future capital projects. The goal of this study is to develop an innovative design and implementation plan for constructing a continuous bikeway along the full length of the Bloor-Danforth corridor. When developing Alternative Solutions, the study will identify potential interim bikeway options/improvements, in the event that the long term preferred design cannot be achieved within a two to three-year time frame. As part of the evaluation of the alternatives, an evaluation on the impact on the role and function of the street, in addition to an evaluation of the economic impact on businesses resulting from any reduction/change in available parking/loading ability and any expected economic effects to businesses resulting from increases in person capacity that are facilitated by accommodating bicycle traffic along the corridor. Finally, included in this analysis is the economic effect of any
  5. 5. proposed changes to parking on City of Toronto revenues. Based on the identification of needs and the problem statement, the Vendor shall develop a reasonable range of alternative solutions. These may include, but not necessarily be limited to the following: • Do-nothing; • Physically separated bike lanes (cycle tracks); • Buffered bike lanes; • Standard bike lanes; • Designated bike routes (signed, shared curb lanes); • Bike lanes in the boulevard; and, • Some combination of the above solutions. The optimal and interim bikeway design may identify where feasible, different solutions for different sections but the bikeway must be continuous through the primary study area. These alternative solutions are to be evaluated using appropriate criteria to identify a preferred alternative solution. Evaluation criteria will be developed in consultation with the Technical Advisory Committee (TAC – described in Section 3.10 of this RFP) within the following broad categories, including but not limited to: • Transportation Operations and Safety; • Socio-Economic Environment; • Natural Environment; and, • Cost. Adequate time should be allotted to account for iterations in the development of the evaluation of alternative solutions, both during the evaluation process and in response to the review by the TAC and comments received through the public consultation process. Development of Alternative Design Solutions Alternative design concepts will be developed for the preferred alternative solution. 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. For alternative design solutions that involve a change in the curb to curb distance this should include the identification of all property requirements and Urban Design requirements as well as the identification of all utility impacts, impacts on connecting roads, on-street parking impacts, street furniture impacts, stormwater management and any other impacts on the existing conditions. Regarding the Urban Design objectives these should, at a minimum, identify the streetscape zones as per the City’s Toronto Urban Design Streetscape manual (Streetscape Manual). The designs should attempt to meet the Streetscape Zone width requirements as identified in the Streetscape Manual. Any trees identified as part of the streetscape should be at grade rather than in planter boxes. In addition, there have been studies undertaken for parts of the corridor that have included an Urban Design component. These studies can be found in the background material list identified in Section 3.2 of this RFP. Public Consultation Public consultation will be a critically important component of this Study. The commercial vitality of Bloor Street and Danforth Avenue is important to all of the neighbourhoods that are centered on Bloor-Danforth corridor. There are 16 Business Improvement Areas along the corridor that are working to improve the public realm within their communities. The Bloor-Danforth corridor
  6. 6. performs a vital transportation function, both the subway underneath and the streets themselves, providing access to destinations on the street and the adjacent neighbourhoods. A very well organized cycling community has been lobbying for bicycle lanes on Bloor Street and Danforth Avenue for the past few years. Achieving a significant bikeway along the Bloor-Danforth corridor could fundamentally change the character of the corridor. The Vendor Team's ability to communicate with the public is important. The Vendor must be able to present (in words, in writing and in images) technical, economic and design related issues in a clear and effective manner. The Vendor will prepare a comprehensive consultation strategy of stakeholders, primarily businesses and residential groups (e.g., the corridor spans 16 Business Improvement Areas), along the corridor in addition to the affected Ward Councillors (the study corridor spans 14 Municipal Wards in three Community Council districts), the Toronto Cycling Advisory Committee, the Toronto Pedestrian Committee, and cycling advocacy groups. A Comprehensive Consultation Strategy must be put forward as a component of the Vendor Team’s proposal. Due to the large study area it is suggested that the primary study area could be divided into at least 5 sections/areas and that a series of at least 3 workshops in each of the sections be held for BIAs, Resident Groups, and Key Stakeholders. The first workshop would be an introduction workshop to present the study, its purpose and other aspects of the study. The second and third workshops would be held with the same groups prior to the PICs. The Vendor will be responsible for all aspects of the Comprehensive Consultation Strategy including public notices, arranging for meeting locations and preparation of workshop materials. The Vendor will be responsible for ensuring that all public notices comply with the City’s notification policy. The City of Toronto’s Public Consultation and Community Outreach Unit will lead the mandatory public consultation component of this study as identified in the MEA Municipal Class EA process; however, the Vendor will provide City staff with technical support at these public meetings. Based on standards developed by the Public Consultation and Community Outreach Unit, this support is to include: • preparation of display boards and drawings; • preparation of handout materials; • preparation of presentations (i.e. slides, PowerPoint); • compiling minutes and notes on issues raised at the Public Information Centres; and • attendance by technical experts at all meetings to present technical issues and/or answer technical questions. All materials prepared by the Vendor will be reviewed by the TAC prior to being finalized for public review. To allow sufficient time for the TAC to review and revisions to be completed, all displays and technical materials should be drafted at least three weeks prior to the planned date for a public meeting. Due to limitations regarding public consultation during the period leading up to the 2010 Municipal Election the PICs would be staged after the Municipal Election. Stakeholder consultations can occur during this period, however, consultations involving City Councillors should not be scheduled between July and November, 2010. Project Meetings For the purposes of budgeting, it is assumed that at a minimum the following meetings will be part of the public consultation program:
  7. 7. • 10 meetings with individual interest groups, ratepayers and property owners , as required; (this will have to be revised as it really is dependent upon the consultation strategy that the Vendor develops) • 5 meetings with affected agencies (TTC, GO, etc.); • 10 Public Information Centres (PICs) – this is a result of the length of the study corridor, covering many neighbourhoods. The area should be divided into at least 5 sections/areas with 1 PICs per section/area at the end of Phases 2 and 3 of the MEA Class EA process; 2 meetings with City of Toronto Council/Committees; and • 3 meetings with the City of Toronto Cycling Advisory Committee, and Toronto Pedestrian Committee • 3 meetings with the cycling advocacy groups, and • 5 contingency meetings. This list will be revised according to the finalized comprehensive consultation strategy that will be prepared by the Vendor. The above meetings are in addition to meetings with the Project Team and the Technical Advisory Committee. These meetings will be held as follows: • Project Team Meetings: Monthly; and, • Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) Meetings: at all major milestones. It is expected that the Proponent will provide a rationale for the number of meetings chosen and the timing of the meetings within the study schedule. The Vendor will organize, prepare agendas and all necessary materials, attend and minute all meetings of the Project Team and Technical Advisory Committee. Minutes are due no later than one week after the meeting. Deliverables The main deliverables of this assignment are: • 3 technical memos will be prepared as follows: o No. 1 – Problem Statement and Needs Assessment; o No. 2 – Identification and Evaluation of Alternative Design Solutions; o No. 3 – Methodology and Results/Recommendations of Traffic Analysis; • 60 copies of the Environmental Study Report that will document the study process and will conform to the requirements of the Municipal Class Environmental Assessment and which shall include the following elements: o a clear and concise description of the work undertaken, the alternative design solutions developed and evaluated, leading to the selection of the preferred alternative design solution and preliminary design; o a detailed cost estimate for the preferred detailed design solution including design assumptions and unit costs; o a phasing plan for the entire study corridor o all technical data collected, results of various analyses, correspondence with the public, agencies and business owners, comments received at PICs and responses to them shall be included as Appendices; o functional plan, profiles, property protection plans and any other drawings at an appropriate scale; and, o 3 electronic copies of the Syncro model. • any materials, displays or presentations required for Public Information Centres; • MS Word document and PDF format of the Project File; • one unbound “camera-ready” copy of the final report; • digital plans of the preferred detailed design alternative at a scale of 1:500; urban design/landscape architectural drawings as follows: conceptual landscape/layout plans at a scale
  8. 8. no smaller than 1:500; streetscape plans at a scale of 1:200; and streetscape details and sections at a scale no smaller than 1:100, all plans shall be created using CAD technology and shall be submitted on compact discs in Microstation Version V8. The Vendor should also allow for a sufficient number of draft documents, as well as sufficient time in the schedule for City staff to review the above reports prior to final documents being produced. Organization Staff of the Infrastructure Planning Unit will manage the project for the Transportation Services Division and will be responsible for overseeing the traffic engineering and contractual aspects of this study. A Project Team will be formed and will consist of City staff from Transportation Services, City Planning, and Technical Services. A Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) will also be formed and will consist of members of the Project Team, as well as staff from Toronto Water, the Toronto Parking Authority and Emergency Services. The TAC will be key in assisting the City’s Project Manager with issues related to achieving the objectives that are key to this project. The successful Proponent will have a similar team arrangement, whereby primary expertise will be provided in the fields of traffic operations, traffic planning, structural and road design, urban design and landscape architecture. The team is expected to work closely together with the urban design contact playing a lead role in the development of the options that would be analyzed and evaluated. 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 will organize, prepare agendas and all necessary materials, attend and minute all Project Team and TAC meetings. Items/Services Provided by the City The City of Toronto will: • provide available existing structural drawings; • provide available general arrangement drawings; • provide specifications for digital drawings; • provide base mapping of the study area for the parameters as described in the Study Area; • provide available urban design and traffic data; • provide information on recently approved developments; • receive and summarize comments from all public meetings; • correspond directly with all government review agencies and members of the public with technical input from the Vendor; • provide liaison by the City Project Manager who will act as the main point of contact for all information requests on the project from internal/external stakeholders and the media; and • lead the mandatory Public Consultation component, as per the MEA Municipal Class EA, of this study with staff from the City of Toronto’s Public Consultation and Community Outreach Unit. This includes directly arranging and paying for: o all costs associated with the printing and distribution of flyers; o the placement of newspaper advertisements; o the bookings of venues for public meetings; o recording Minutes at public meetings; and o chairing and facilitating public meetings.

×