Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCIS Agenda - 2021-06-14Community & Infrastructure Services Committee Agenda Monday, June 14, 2021 1:00 p.m. - 2:30 p.m. Office of the City Clerk Electronic Meeting Kitchener City Hall nd 200 King St. W. - 2 Floor Kitchener ON N2G 4G7 Page 1 Chair - Councillor B. Ioannidis Vice-Chair - Councillor D. Schnider Due to COVID-19 restrictions City Hall is not open except for very limited services by appointment only. Members of public are invited to participate in this meeting electronically by accessing the meeting live-stream video at kitchener.ca/watchnow. While in-person delegation requests are not feasible at this time, members of the public are invited to submit written comments or participate electronically in the meeting by contacting delegation@kitchener.ca. Delegates must register by 11:00 a.m. on June 14, 2021, in order to participate electronically. Written comments will be circulated prior to the meeting and will form part of the public record. Consent Items The following matters are considered not to require debate and should be approved by one motion in accordance with the recommendation contained in each staff report. A majority vote is required to discuss any report listed as under this section. None Delegations -law, delegations are permitted to address the Committee for a maximum of five (5)minutes. Item 1 - Janine Toms Discussion Items 1.DSD-2021-93 - On-Street Parking Regulations - Peter Street(10 min) 2.DSD-2021-63 - Iron Horse Trail Crossings and Cycling Spot Fixes(30 min) (Staff will provide a 5-minute presentation on this matter) 3.CSD-2021-6-Main Floor Service Centre at City Hall(30 min) (Staff will provide a 5-minute presentation on this matter) Information Items None Dianna Saunderson Committee Administrator ** Accessible formats and communication supports are available upon request. If you require assistance to take part in a city meeting or event, please call 519-741-2345 or TTY 1-866-969-9994 ** REPORT TO:Community and Infrastructure Services Committee DATE OF MEETING:June 14, 2021 SUBMITTED BY:Barry Cronkite, Director, Transportation Services 519-741-2200 ext. 7738 PREPARED BY:Ivan J Balaban, Traffic Technologist, (519) 741-2200x7302 WARD(S) INVOLVED:Ward9 DATE OF REPORT:May 18, 2021 REPORT NO.:DSD-2021-93 SUBJECT:On-Street Parking Regulations–Peter Street RECOMMENDATION: That parking be prohibitedat all timeson the west (even-numbered) side of Peter Street from Martin Street to Whitney Place;and further, Thatthe Uniform Traffic Bylaw be amended accordingly. REPORT HIGHLIGHTS: The purpose of this report isto amend the Uniform Traffic By-Law 2019-113to prohibit parking at all times on theportion of Peter Streetfrom Martin Street to Whitney Place. The key finding of this report isthat residents were surveyed and showed majority support for theparking prohibition recommended herein The financial implications areapproximately $200 and will be taken from the existing sign maintenance budget Affected households were engaged through a mailed survey and notification letters This report supports the delivery of core services. BACKGROUND: Transportation Services has receivedconcerns from residents on Peter Street between Martin Street and Whitney Place, expressing that they are having difficulty accessing their driveways due to the presence of cars parked on-street. This issue is present in the non- winter months, as there is an existingparking prohibition on Peter Street from January 1to March31. This issue began after the completion of a reconstruction project which narrowed the roadway width of Peter Street to approximately 6.5 metres. REPORT: Residents on Peter Street between Martin Street and Whitney Place were surveyed regarding a proposal to prohibit parking at all times on the west (even-numbered) side of *** This information is available in accessible formats upon request. *** Please call 519-741-2345 or TTY 1-866-969-9994 for assistance. Peter Street in this area. This would result in the loss of approximately 5 parking spaces. A survey letter dated April 14, 2021 was mailed to residents, with a response deadline of April 28, 2021. The results of the survey are as follows: Prohibit parking at all times on the west (even-6votes(55% of Respondents) numbered) side of Peter Street from Martin Street to Whitney Place. Leave existing on-street parking as is:5votes(45% of Respondents) TOTAL: 11out of 16responded (69% response rate) Based on the results of this survey, Transportation Services is recommending thatparking be prohibitedat all timeson the west (even-numbered) side of Peter Street from Martin Street to Whitney Place. STRATEGIC PLAN ALIGNMENT: This report supports the delivery of core services. FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS: Capital Budget–The recommendation has no impact on the Capital Budget. Operating Budget–The recommendation has a $200 impact on the Operating Budget for sign installations. These costs will be charged to the existing Sign Maintenance budget COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT: INFORM –This report has been posted to the City’s website with the agenda inadvance of the council / committee meeting.Affected residents were notified of the results of the survey and the date of the meeting through mail. CONSULT –Affected residents were surveyed to determine if there is community support for this change. PREVIOUS REPORTS/AUTHORITIES: City of Kitchener Uniform Traffic By-law No. 2019-113 APPROVEDBY: Justin Readman, General Manager, Development Services Division ATTACHMENTS: Attachment A –Key Map –Peter Street Proposed On-street Parking Regulations Appendix A –Key Map Peter Street Proposed On-street Parking Regulations REPORT TO:Community and Infrastructure Services Committee DATE OF MEETING:June 14, 2021 SUBMITTED BY:Cronkite, Barry, Director, Transportation Services, 519-741-2200 ext. 7738 PREPARED BY:Kropf, Darren, Active Transportation Planning Project Manager, 519-741-2200 ext. 7314 WARD(S) INVOLVED:Wards9, 10 DATE OF REPORT:June 3, 2021 REPORT NO.:DSD-2021-63 SUBJECT:Iron Horse Trail crossings andcycling spot fixes RECOMMENDATION: That pedestrian crossovers (PXOs) be installed on the Iron Horse Trail at Union Boulevard, Glasgow Street, Gage Avenue, West Avenue, Mill Street, Madison Avenue, and Kent Ave; and, That stopping be prohibited at any time 15 metres from the crossing at each approach, and ten (10) metres immediately following each crossing; and, That raised crossings be constructed attheIron Horse Trail at Glasgow Street, Mill Street, and Madison Avenue;and, That aprojectbudget of $250,000 be allocated from theremaining Ontario Municipal Commuter Cycling grant and the Iron Horse Trail improvements accountfor installation of PXOs and raised crossings on the Iron Horse Trail;andfurther, That the existing stop controls at Young Street/Ahrens Avenue be reversed to require eastboundand westboundtraffic on Ahrens Avenue to stopat Young Street while permitting traffic on Young Street to travel through Ahrens Avenue without stopping; and, That the existing stop controls at Chapel Street and Merner Avenue be reversed to require northboundand southbound traffic on Merner Avenueto stop at Chapel Streetwhile permitting traffic on ChapelStreet to travel through Merner Avenue without stopping; and, That the existing stop controls at ChurchStreet and Cedar Streetbe reversed to require northboundand southbound traffic on Cedar Streetto stop at Church Street *** This information is available in accessible formats upon request. *** Please call 519-741-2345 or TTY 1-866-969-9994 for assistance. while permitting traffic on ChurchStreet to travel through Cedar Streetwithout stopping; andfurther, That four parking spaces on Francis Street (between Charles Street West and Hall’s Lane West) berestricted between6:30 to 9:30 a.m.,2:30 to 6:00 p.m.and 10:30 to 11:30 p.m.to permit buslay-by areas until the Regional Transit Hub is operational; andfurther, That the Uniform Traffic Bylaw be amended accordingly. REPORT HIGHLIGHTS: This report provides proposed improvements on allIron Horse Trail crossingsalong municipal roadways, including pedestrian crossovers (PXOs), some of which will be combinedwith refuge islands and/orraised crossings. Funding for the crossings is accounted for by theremaining funds in the Ontario Municipal Commuter Cycling grant fundingandIron Horse Trail improvement account. Community engagement occurred during the Iron Horse Trail Improvement Strategy (2015)and an open house in 2019. The desire for safer trail crossings was also identified in consultations forComplete Streets, Cycling and Trails Master Plan and Vision Zero.The stop sign and parking restrictions are required for implementation of the Downtown Cycling Grid, which included over 1,200 residents consulted during the finalphase of community engagement. This report supports People-friendly Transportation. BACKGROUND: The Iron Horse Trail is the city’s busiest trail, with over 250,000 trips a year by pedestrians and cyclists of all ages andabilities. Guided by the Iron Horse Trail Improvement Strategy (2015), recent investments in the trail have improved the trail’s function, safety and comfort, including trail widening, benches, lighting and landscaping. Continuing with these improvements, city staff is proposing to improve safety and accessibility at all IronHorse Trail crossingsat municipal roadways,with the installation of Pedestrian Crossovers (PXOs)and in some casesraised crossings or refuge islands. This work is a continuation of the Ontario Municipal Commuter Cycling Program. In 2020, tenders for eligible projects under the Ontario Municipal Commuter Cycling program came in under budget, leaving $110,000 of grant funding to spend in 2021. Improvements to the Iron Horse Trail crossings is listed on the city’sOMCC eligible project list. REPORT: Iron Horse Trailstreet crossings The Iron Horse Trail Improvement Strategy included“Recommendation 5.3 Trail Use, Safety and Accessibility.”Trail crossings werethe top priority identified by the community to improve trail safety.Further, crossings of a roadway are generally the area of greatest safety concern for any trail. Staff’s intent is togrant trail usersthe legal right of wayat all municipal road crossings along the IronHorse Trail.Additionally, physical design measureshave been included at major crossingsthat demonstrate trail user priority andimprove accessibility andsafety. About Pedestrian Crossovers (PXOs) PXOs provide pedestrians with crossing opportunities by requiring motorists to yield to pedestrians within the crosswalk.Thepresence of a pedestrian in the crosswalk requires the driver of a vehicle approaching the crossover tostop before entering the crossover. Ontario Traffic Manual(OTM)Book 15: Pedestrian Crossing Treatmentsprovides guidance for the selection and design of PXOs.PXOs are recommended when the following conditions are met: 100 or more pedestrians observed crossing over an 8-hourperiod; 750 vehicles per 8-hourperiod; No other controlled crossing within 200 m; Adherence to Ontario Traffic Manual Book 15 lane configuration and traffic volume conditions; and Posted speed limit It is worth noting that these requirements are subject to an assessment using sound technical engineering judgement.Further, if the site location is within 200 m of a traffic control device, a PXO can still be warranted if there is a “requirement for system connectivity” or the location is “on pedestrian desire lines.” Based on these criteria, city staff support PXOs at all city-owned crossings.See Attachment A for warrant justification. The Region of Waterloosupports PXOs on city-owned streets where analysis has found there will not be concerns with adjacent signal operations.Atthe Region’s request,a queuing analysis was conducted and the resultsindicate that queuing is not expected to be an issue, with the exception of GlasgowStreet, where westbound traffic may back up into the PXO during PM peak hours.Due to this concern, the Region does not support a PXO at Glasgow Street and notes any future operational concerns because ofthe proposed PXOwould be the city’s responsibility to address. There are four types of PXOs, as directed by OTM Book 15. See Attachment Bfor the two types recommended in this report. The distinguishing feature is Type B includes flashing beacons –activated by pedestrians with a push button–while Type D does not include the beacons.Both types grant legal right of way to pedestrians, butthe flashing beacons are used on higher volume streetsfor greater visibilityand awareness to drivers. Currently, legislation does not allow the city to provide crossrides at PXOs,meaning cyclists are to dismount and cross as a pedestrian. Cityof Kitchenerstaff have advocated alongside othermunicipalities for inclusion of crossridesat PXOs during the update to OTM Book 18: Cycling Facilitiesin 2019-2021and througha letter to the Ministry of Transportation sent through theRoad Safety Committee of Ontario(ROSCO) on March 24, 2021.In themeantime, city staff will installthe proposed PXOsin such a waythat crossridescan be easily installedif future legislation allows. Physical measures City staff observationhas found that driver yield compliance at PXOs can be improved with physical measures such as raised crossings, refuge islands and street narrowing.City staff intend to continue studying driver compliance at PXOs.In addition to driver yield compliance, there are additional benefits of raised trail crossings, including greater visibilityof vulnerable usersandimproved accessibility. The raised crossings are being designed to remain smooth and flush with the trail, which greatly improves accessibility of the crossing. Thiswillrequirenew or relocated catch basins for drainage, which has been accounted for within the overall project scope and budget. Breakdown of all city-owned crossings Street crossingCurrent conditionsProposed improvements Union BoulevardRefuge islandPXO Type B Glasgow StreetNo crossing featuresPXO Type Band raised crossing Gage AvenueNo crossing featuresPXO Type D(In scheduled reconstruction, consider raised crossing) West AvenueRefuge islandPXO Type D Mill StreetNo crossing featuresPXO Type Band raised crossing Madison AvenueNo crossing featuresPXO Type Dand raised crossing Palmer AvenueNo crossing featuresYield sign Kent AvenueNo crossingfeaturesPXO TypeD(In scheduled reconstruction, consider raised crossing) The crossings at Victoria Street, Queen Street, Courtland Avenue, Borden Avenue and Ottawa Street are under the jurisdiction of the Region of Waterloo.Stop signs and “Wait forGap”signs will be installed on trail approachesto regional roadsso trail users know they do not have the right of way over vehicles. In addition, city staff are recommending a new form of vehicle control be added to trail crossings todeter illegal cars from accessing the trails but still allow access for maintenance vehicles. These flex stakes are the same standard as seasonal traffic calming, but with customartwork that indicates illegalusers (i.e. no cars allowed)and intended users(i.e. pedestrians and cyclists allowed). These will be installed on all city and regional street trail crossings, starting with the Iron Horse Trail. Re-orienting stop signsfor Neighbourhood Bikeways In DSD-20-203 ProtectedDowntown Cycling Grid, City Council approved neighbourhood bikeways on Young Street, Chapel Street and Cedar Street. Upon further analysis for construction this summer, staff recommends switching the orientation of the existing stop controlat theintersections of Young/Ahrens, Chapel/Merner and Church/Cedar.This is guidedby OTM Book 18,whichstates: "Priority should be given to people cycling when a neighbourhood bikeway crosses a minor street, toreduce the travel time for cyclists. It is desirable to provide a continuous bikeway without stop control for cyclists." The new stop controlwould: require eastboundand westboundtraffic on Ahrens Avenue to stop at Young Street while permitting traffic on Young Street to travel through Ahrens Avenue without stopping; require northboundand southbound traffic on Merner Avenueto stop at Chapel Streetwhile permitting traffic on ChapelStreet to travel through Merner Avenue without stopping;and require northboundand southbound traffic on Cedar Streetto stop at Church Street while permitting traffic on ChurchStreet to travel through Cedar Streetwithout stopping. According toOTM Book 5, where right-of-way is being reassigned from onestreetto another crossing street, through theelimination of an existing stopsign control and the installation of stopsign controlon the previouslyuncontrolled roadway, an introductory period isrequired to safely carry out the transition.This includes an all-way stop for 15 days, with warning signage of the upcoming removal of stop signs on the original streets with stop signs. Francis Street parking restrictions In DSD-20-203 Protected Downtown Cycling Grid, City Council approved the conversion of Joseph Street to one-way operationin order to install new separated bike lanes. While Joseph Street does not have bus stops, GRT had been using Joseph Street for Route #34 as a turn-around, as well as the loadingbayson Water Street as layby waiting areas. As an alternative, GRT has requested the use of the parking bay on the east side of Francis Streetbetween Charles Street and Hall’s Lane, during the times of 6:30 to 9:30 a.m., 2:30 to 6:00 p.m.and 10:30 to 11:30 p.m.These times do not conflict with peak parking demand for thesespaces and is not expectedto cause parking scarcity, given the parking bay across the street will remain available for use during the time of restrictions. This parking restriction is expected to be removed when the King Victoria Transit Hub is in operation. STRATEGIC PLAN ALIGNMENT: This report supports People-friendly Transportation. FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS: Capital Budget–Thetotal cost of $250,000is accounted for through previously approved budgets. UpgradeTotalCostBudget Line PXOs and raised $240,000OMCC (up to $110,000) & crossingsIron Horse Trail account (remaining) Regional road stop$2,000Iron Horse Trail account control Flex stake vehicle control$7,000Iron Horse Trail account Re-oriented stop control $1,000General Sign operating at Young/Ahrens,budget Chapel/Merner and Church/Cedar& Francis Street parking bay signage Total$250,000 All work is scheduled for fall 2021. The OMCC fundingmust be used prior to the end of 2021or the funds willbe returned to the province.Given this constrained timeline, staff is proposingthe creation of a new capital project to allow timely procurement of the scope of work. Operating Budget–Some additional maintenance is required of the new crossing treatments: The flashing beacons will requireminimalelectricity and electrical repairand are accounted for in the streetlight operating costs; Pavement markings are to be durable thermoplastic, requiring replacement every 5- 8 years; and Signs will need eventual replacement due to graffiti or wear and tear. Life cycle costsof the eight PXOsfor the expenses listed aboveareestimated at an annualized rate of $4,000. COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT: INFORM –This report has been posted to the City’s website with the agenda in advance of the council/ committee meeting.Notices were mailedto properties adjacent to the crossings. CONSULT –Significant engagement occurred during thedevelopment of theIron Horse Trail Improvement Strategy in 2015, with 884 residents providing feedback. A major theme during this engagement was the need for safer road crossings: “Based on comments received through the public consultation process, a primary safety concernand identified priority is the improvement of trail-road intersections and crossings, specifically in terms of providing safer crossings with improved accessibility…This issue is the most recurring item that was brought up through the process by the community.” OnJanuary16, 2019,an open house was hosted to introduce scheduled improvements, with 84residents providing feedback.Nearly half of all comments provided were requests for safer trail crossings. In 2019, Complete Streets consultations engaged 610 residents on how to design streets for all modes of transportation. An action item was identified to provide raised crossingsto increase visibility and demonstrate priority for vulnerable users, especially at mid-block trail crossings. In 2018-2019, Cycling and Trails Master Plan consultations engaged over 3,200residents. Action 1A-4 includes thecreation of aspot improvement program for locations identified by residents as safety concerns. As seen in AppendixC, trail crossingsalong the Iron Horse Trail were identified as priorities by residents. In fall 2020, Vision Zero consultations engaged300 people on how safe they feel on city streets. The need for more frequent, safe pedestrian crossings was identified by residents as an important way to make city streetssafer. In addition, residents noted that physical design measures should accompanyPXOs to ensure drivers are fully aware of their responsibility to yield to pedestrians. On May 11, 2021, the Cycling and Trails Advisory Committee commented on the proposed plans and requested a greater use of flashingbeacons at PXOs to ensure greater driver compliance in yielding. A unanimous motion was passed: “That the committee supports the proposedplan to add PXOs and raised crossings tocity-owned streets.” OnMay27,2021, the Grand River Accessibility Advisory Committee reviewedproposed plansand offered the following comments: Really pleased to see the new raised standard that is smooth and flush, which is a great improvement for people in wheelchairs; Consistency for all trailsis really important for usersand wants to see the City of Waterloo and Region of Waterloo provide similar improvements; and Tactile guidance across the street would be helpful for people with visual impairments who find it difficult to determine the direct line of travel. PREVIOUS REPORTS/AUTHORITIES: DSD-20-203Protected Downtown Cycling Grid INS-20-015Cycling and Trails Master Plan DSD-19-235Complete Streets INS-15-058Iron Horse Trail Improvement Strategy APPROVEDBY: Justin Readman, General Manager ATTACHMENTS: Attachment A–PXO Warrants Attachment B -PXOTypes Attachment C–Spot Improvements ATTACHMENT A: PXO WARRANTS UNION STREET JustificationRequired Actual Conditions Pedestrian Warrant ValueValueSatisfied?Connectivity? 1. 8-hour Pedestrian > 100 peds200 pedsYES Volume at proposed crossover location 2. 8-hour Two-way > 750 veh4475 vehYES Vehicle Volume PXO Level 2 3. Distance from > 200 metres75 mNOYES Type B Nearest Controlled Crossing 4. Engineering Volume of vehicles suggests PXO Level 2 Type C but due to high Judgementspeedof roadway, proximity to signalsand bend in road near crossing, staff recommendgreater awareness of PXOthrough use of flashing beacons. GLASGOW STREET JustificationRequired Actual Conditions Pedestrian Warrant ValueValueSatisfied?Connectivity? 1. 8-hour Pedestrian > 100 peds200 pedsYES Volume at proposed crossover location 2. 8-hour Two-way > 750 veh3440vehYES Vehicle Volume 3. Distancefrom > 200 metres70 mNOYES PXO Level 2 Nearest Controlled Type B Crossing 4. Engineering Volume of vehicles suggests PXO Level 2 Type C but due to high Judgementspeed of roadway and proximity to signal, staff recommend greater awareness of PXOthrough use of flashing beacons. Westbound traffic queues from Belmont/Glasgow may extend through the PXO during the peak hour. GAGE AVENUE JustificationRequired Actual Conditions Pedestrian Warrant ValueValueSatisfied?Connectivity? 1. 8-hour Pedestrian > 100 peds200 pedsYES Volume at proposed crossover location 2. 8-hour Two-way > 750 veh1014vehYES Vehicle Volume PXO Level 2 Type D 3. Distance from > 200 metres80mNOYES Nearest Controlled Crossing 4. Engineering Judgement WEST AVENUE JustificationRequired Actual Conditions Pedestrian Warrant ValueValueSatisfied?Connectivity? 1. 8-hour Pedestrian > 100 peds200 pedsYES Volume at proposed crossover location 2. 8-hour Two-way > 75 veh1928 vehYES Vehicle Volume PXO Level 2 Type D 3. Distance from > 200 metres85 mNOYES Nearest Controlled Crossing 4. Engineering Judgement MILL STREET JustificationRequired Actual Conditions Pedestrian Warrant ValueValueSatisfied?Connectivity? 1. 8-hour Pedestrian > 100 peds148 pedsYES Volume at proposed crossover location 2. 8-hour Two-way > 750 veh961 vehYES Vehicle Volume PXO Level 2 3. Distance from > 200 metres60 mNOYES Type B Nearest Controlled Crossing 4. Engineering Volume of vehicles suggest Type D but due toproximity to Judgementrailway,highervehiclespeeds and arterialroad designation, staff recommend flashing beacons MADISON AVENUE JustificationRequired Actual Conditions Pedestrian Warrant ValueValueSatisfied?Connectivity? 1. 8-hour Pedestrian > 100 peds148 pedsYES Volume at proposed crossover location 2.8-hour Two-way > 750 veh1955 vehYES Vehicle Volume PXO Level 2 Type D 3. Distance from > 200 metres150 mNOYES Nearest Controlled Crossing 4. Engineering Judgement PALMER AVENUE JustificationRequired Actual Conditions Pedestrian Warrant ValueValueSatisfied?Connectivity? 1. 8-hour Pedestrian > 100 peds148 pedsYES Volume at proposed crossover location 2.8-hour Two-way > 750 veh5 vehNO Vehicle Volume Yield control 3. Distance from > 200 metres70 mNOYES Nearest Controlled Crossing 4. Engineering Extremely low vehicle volumes suggest yield control for trail Judgementusers instead of PXO KENT AVENUE JustificationRequired Actual Conditions Pedestrian Warrant ValueValueSatisfied?Connectivity? 1. 8-hour Pedestrian > 100 peds68 pedsNO Volume at proposed crossover location 2. 8-hour Two-way > 750 veh443 vehNO Vehicle Volume PXO Level 2 3. Distance from > 200 metres225mYESYES Type D Nearest Controlled Crossing 4. Engineering Consistency with rest of trail corridor justifies PXO. Further, Judgementfuture development on Courtland Avenue will generate more pedestrian and vehicle traffic. Note: Due to COVID-19 restrictions, 8-hour pedestrian counts were not conducted in person. Rather, the nearest Iron Horse Trail counter was used to justify pedestrian demand. ATTACHMENT B: PXO TYPES Level 2 Pedestrian Crossover Treatments –Type B (OTM Book 15 –Pedestrian Crossover Treatments) Kitchener examples include Jubilee Drivein Victoria Parkand King Street at Cameron Street. 1 Kitchener examples include the Henry Sturm Trail at West Avenue and Patricia Avenue and the Transit Hub Trail at Park Street. ATTACHMENT C:SPOT FIXES Cycling and Trails Master Plan: Connections Report, page 19. REPORT TO:Community & Infrastructure Services Committee DATE OF MEETING:June 14, 2021 SUBMITTED BY:Jana Miller, Director, Corporate Customer Service, 519-741-2200 ext. 7231 PREPARED BY:Jana Miller, Director, Corporate Customer Service, 519-741-2200 ext. 7231 Christine Baker, Supervisor, Customer Experience, 519-741-2200 ext.7328 WARD(S) INVOLVED:All DATE OF REPORT:June 2, 2021 REPORT NO.:CSD-2021-6 SUBJECT:Main Floor Service Centre at City Hall RECOMMENDATION: That the vision for a consolidated service centre on the main floor of City Hallbe endorsedas outlined in CSD-2021-6, and staff be directedto prepare a detailed costing for the new centre to be considered as part of the 2022 budget process. REPORT HIGHLIGHTS: This report presents the vision for a main floor service centre at City Hall where service always comes to the citizen,and wayfinding to multiple service counters on multiple floors is eliminated. Customers would arrive at one place (that is easy to find even if you’ve never been to City Hall before) and it would always be the right place to receive service and information The vision for thenew in-person service model includes:a general information desk, a single,expanded service counter and a new service support centre. If Council supports the vision for the new main floor service centre, staff will prepare detailed design concepts and budget considerations for this workto be considered as part of the 2022 budget process. Efforts to create a main floor service centre at City Hall area direct response to feedback from Kitchener citizens received through the extensive engagement process that informed the 2018 Customer Service Review and the Development Services Review, which concluded in 2020. This report aligns with the Strategic Plan theme of Great Customer Service. The vision for transforming in-person service at Kitchener City Hall supports this priority by ensuring that access to City services, across all service channels, is convenient and easy for citizens. *** This information is available in accessible formats upon request. *** Please call 519-741-2345 or TTY 1-866-969-9994 for assistance. BACKGROUND: In 2018 the City commissioned a statistically-representative survey of Kitchener residents to assist staff in understanding what citizens value in their service experiences with the City, what challengesthey experience when accessing services and programs, and what barriers staff encounter in providing great service to citizens. The survey‘s findings created the basis for additional phasesof the community engagementprocess that informed the City’s comprehensive Customer Service Review–essentially a deeper diveinto the customer experience with theCity,with more than 5,500 staff and citizens. According to the Environics survey, in-person service, particularly at City Hall and community centres, remains the most popular service channel for customer interactions. The survey revealed that 42% of service interactions with the City were performed in person, hundreds of them each week at City Hall. Even during the pandemic, staff have continued toserve200-250 citizens every weekwho are accessing City Hall as walk-ins orfor prescheduled appointmentsthat were booked online. Other relevant results from the statistically representative survey of Kitchener residents included: 24% of citizens who do not use online services with the City said this is because they prefer to interact with us in person. This was the number #1 reason why citizens do not use the City website. In terms of how the in-person channel is currently used to access City services, it is used by: o 87% of citizens paying for parking transponders or passes o 76% of citizens seeking a marriageor business licenses o 43% of citizens applying for building permits o 40% of citizens paying parking tickets o 31% of citizens registering for programs o 18% of citizens accessing Kitchener Utilities for payments or information Customer Service Review In 2018, the City’s Customer Service Review –which engaged 5,500 staff and citizens– revealed that three of the top 10 complaints for citizens expressing frustration when accessing City programs were directly related to challenges with in-person service at City Hall. They included: #1-Not knowing who to reach, call or talk to, to answer my questions or inquiries #6-Having to visit multiple service counters or facilities to access services #8-Services are not integrated and I have to provide the same information multiple times Development Services Review Staff undertaking the Development Services Review heard many comments about the current customer experience at Building, Planning and Engineering counters within City Hall –which generally representan overall complaint, about having multiple counters on multiple floors.They found that, because of the nature of their plans, customers are often required to deal with all three service areas and they were often frustrated with having to bounce between multiple counters, on multiple floors, to submit fees and applications, or to get answers or status updates on their project. Staff and Public Safety Overall, multiple service counters on multiple floors of City Hall also poses challenges because it means that most floors (including all staff workspaces) remain open for public access. Most do not have physical barriers to unauthorized space which can be seen as an opportunity for the public to walk through the floors. General access to unauthorized spaces over the past three years alone have resulted in the need for Security response to: Staff working alone being confronted and intimidated by a member of the public without quick access to safe exit Unauthorized filming and photography of City Hall spaces and staff without consent Theft of personal and City property REPORT: CurrentSituation While other service channels, including online and telephone, are also very important to citizens and have undergone substantial improvements in recent years, with the introduction of the MyKitchener online service portal (2021) and the Corporate Contact Centre which became 24-7 in 2014, in-person service remains the same since City Hall was opened 28 years ago –with multiple service counters on multiple floors of the building. For the first time, in 2020, staff were forced to rethink how in-person service could be delivered safely and effectively on a single floor at City Hall to ensure the safety of both citizens and staff as well as adherence to pandemic restrictions implemented by the provincial government. Kitchener City Hall currently has eleven service counters on six floors that citizens must navigate in order to receive in-person service for popular services including: general inquiries, marriage and business licenses, making paymentsfor taxes, utilities, parking tickets, planning and development permits obtaining and paying for a building permits, planning and engineering advice and application processing, assistance with recreation program and Leisure Access Card registration, and picking up parking transponders for City lots. Inmanycases, citizens must navigate multiple counters on multiple floors to complete a single transaction. This does not include the Office of the Mayor and Council where citizens also often make in-person inquiries.Additionally, wayfinding, in general, has been a consistent issue for citizens visiting City Hall for service, since it opened. Most often, citizens entering the Rotunda who do not know where to go, stop to ask Security personnel who then must take time away from focusing on core Security services, to provide directions. This occurs many times each day. To understand the additional challenges that customers currently face when trying to receive in-person service at City Hall, below are two examples. Example#1:permit applicationsand inquiries There are various types of permits and licences throughout City Hall, and many activities may require one or more permits or licences for the same activity (example: construction projects, renovations, business licences) and customers come to City Hall to make an inquiry as to what they need in order to proceed. Sometimes a customer may need to go to multiple floors to make all the inquiries they need in order to obtain the information they are seeking. For example, to ask questions about zoning or to obtain an occupancy permit related to th starting a business, a customer may need to visit Planning on the 6floor as well as ndth Licensing Services on the 2floor. They will need to visit Building on the 5floor if a building permit is required for any reason. Example#2:a customer building a shed or an addition to their home th The customer might go to the 5floor in search of information about what is required and/or to obtain a building permit. th Once they arrive on the 5floor the wait time to talk with someone will depend on season/customer traffic and availability of staff to meet with customers. Fewer admin staff at our service counters means that service is not immediate. Building will listen to the customer needs to determine the process and building implications and discuss other relevant considerations. Frequently, one of those considerations will be setbacks and whether zoning allows this type of construction, something that Building may not be able to easily confirm. th So, the customer will be directed to the 6floor to speak with Planning. Waittimes will depend on season/customer traffic and staff availability. The customer will once again describe what they are trying to do, staff will collect the details they need to determine whether this would be allowed under the current zoning. th If so, the customer could return to the 5floor and Building will assist the customer with how to apply and template drawings. Wait times will depend on season/customer traffic and availability of staff to meet with customers. With multiple service counters on multiple floors, the customer is often expected to figure out what order to navigate the process in because it is not clear which service area they should start with, or what order they need to use to get the information they need. Information is given out piece by piece at each counter. In many cases, the customer isalso expected to relay the information from each service area they’ve spoken to, to the next service area, and repeat the same questions with new City staff at each counter they visit. Additionally, because we’ve reduced administrative support staff in many areas over time at the City, there are difficulties forsome areas in staffing their counters which results in longer wait times and the customer further being bounced between staff on different floors to get information or service. The ideal in-person service experience In an ideal service experience at City Hall, service would always come to the customer, not the other way around –as it is currently. Customers would arrive at one place(that is easy to find even if you’ve never been to City Hall before) and it would always be the right placeto receive service and information–whether they’ve arrived as a walk-in customer or for a pre-scheduled appointment. The vision for in-person customer service at Kitchener City Hall is for a true one-stop-shop, main-floor “service centre” that creates this single place to go for service –for appointments and walk-in service –for service areas including: Legislated Services, Revenue, Planning, th Building, Engineering, Transportation Services, Special Events (bookings), and 7floor inquiries about programs and Leisure Access Card registration. City Hall Service Centre Vision While more extensive development of location, design concepts and budgetconsideration is still required, at a high level, the vision for a one-stop shop service centre at City Hall includes: 1.A centralized, easy-to-findcheck-in/general information deskon the main floor (with electronic check-inavailable) a.Would act as a central point for electronic/digital check ins before customers head to the service counteras well as continuing to act as a central point for City information when entering City Hall for any reason. 2.A single, expanded service counter a.Located on the main floor–whereall in-person service needs for any City Hall service area can be met without having to travel between many floors looking for “the right place” –via prescheduled appointments booked online or through walk-in service inquiries. 3.A“Service Support Centre” o A separate area, close to the service counter, where staff from each service area (eg. Planning, Building, Licensing, Community Services) can rotate through (weekly or daily, to work in touch down spaces) to provide wrap-around support formore complexinquiries and/or totake pre-scheduled appointments. This is similar to what occurs now (pre-pandemic) with service counters on multiple floors, however this would place needed staff on the main floor so no navigating is required. Maintaining an appointment-based schedule will assist in ensuring the appropriate staff person can be available to handle complex appointments, particularly where specific staff is assigned to the project in question. If a walk-in inquiry is more complex orproject-specific than the support staff on duty is able to answer, a member of the management team or the staff person working on the specific project, could be called down to meet with the customer. If this is not possible, due to meetings or absence, an appointment for follow-up in-person or by telephone will be made before the customer leaves. Service will always come to the customer. o Would also provide spaceoptions for customer appointmentsand privacy, including large tables, meeting rooms/pods etc. o The vision for the support centre is essentially a permanent version of the approach the City is currently taking to providing in-person service at City Hall during the pandemic. During the pandemic, the City has continued to offer essential services via online prescheduled appointments and through walk-in service for several areas including: Legislated Services, Revenue, Planning, Building, Engineering, and Transportation Services (Parking). Staff have continued to serve 200-250 customers each week in-person, the majority of them as walk-in customers. Both staff and citizens are becoming accustomed to receiving service on the main floor only; citizens have remarked that it is much easier for the service to come to them (which is the vision for the new main floor service centre), than for them to navigate to other floors. All in-person service interactions take place on the main floor at areas including the current Service Information Counter, the Revenue Counter, and at tables that enable social distancing within the Rotunda space. Benefits of a Consolidated Main-Floor Service Centre: Introducing a centralizedmain-floor service centre at City Hallwould address the frustrations expressed by citizens through recent comprehensive service reviews and would create several important benefits to them, including: 1.A convenient one-stop-shop where customers can access all City Hall services a.Improves the most popular way citizens access the City –42% of interactions are in person at City Hall and community centres (Environics, December 2017) b.Immediately simplifies wayfinding at City Hall; eliminatesthe need for citizens to travel from floor to floor/counter to counterto access/try to find services. Customers will always easily arrive at the right place for service. i.An additional benefit related to wayfinding is that this will reduce the significant attention Security staff currently provides to citizens seeking directions, so that they can focus on core Security services. c.Customers would enjoy a similar experience in-person as they now do online –with everything simplified and conveniently offered in one place. This is known as “channel consistency”and is also one of the four principlesof providing greatcustomer service which wereapproved by Council in 2013. d.Creates consistency of in-person service experiences for all service areas at City Hall in terms of customer service approach, philosophy, application of policies, business processes, training for staff etc. e.Enables more/better collection of data (eg. numbers of walk-ins and appointments, real-time information about their service experience etc.) to inform further improvements to the in-person service experience, and which can be used to create a more fulsome picture of overall service at the City. a.Continues the main floor service model staff and customers have become familiar with during the pandemic. 2.Address the barriers to receiving great customer service at City Hall as identified in the 2018 Customer Service Review and 2020 Development Services Review a.Eliminates the needto navigate departments, multiple floors and multiple service counters tofind the right staff person to talkto, which citizens said they foundconfusing/difficult. b.Eliminates being passed/bounced around from staff to staff –a strong theme emerged from both reviews about reducing the amount of ‘bouncing around’ citizens face both in person and on the phone. In late 2020, Corporate Customer Service staff met with all City Hall service counter groups to discuss opportunities, challenges, and specific requirements they might have under a consolidated service counter model at City Hall. Service Counter areas interviewed included: Revenue, Security, Legislated Services, Small Business Centre, Engineering, Building, Parking/Transportation Planning, Planning, DSD (in relation to findings of DSD review), Corporate Contact Centre/Information Services Desk, Special Events, and th Community Services (7 floor counter). Representatives from the service areas interviewed were understanding andgenerally supportive of the idea of moving to a consolidated in- person service approach. Several common needs were identified including: accessible counter space, specific technology needs, locked storage, private meeting spaces, and the desire to keep anappointment-based model. Determining the final scope for theprojectand developing design concepts and budget considerations is the next step and will require further discussionwith service counter teams. Once staff have prepared a detailed concept for the centre a financial proposal would be brought forward as part of the 2022 budget process for Council’s consideration. STRATEGIC PLAN ALIGNMENT: This report aligns with the Strategic Plan theme of Great Customer Service.The vision for transforming in-person service at Kitchener City Hall supports this priority by ensuring that access to City services, across all service channels, is convenient and easy for citizens. FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS: There is substantial work still to be done relatedto design concepts and their related costs. Staff can confirm that therewill be one-time up-front capital costs required to configure the main-floor space and there may be some operating impacts to delivering this newin-person servicemodel. It is anticipated that the delivery of service will largely rely on existing staff. As indicated above, if Council supports the vision for this new consolidated service centre, staff will prepare detailed design concepts and budget considerations for this work. COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT: INFORM –This report has been posted to the City’s website with the agenda in advance of the council / committee meeting. CONSULT –This initiative is a direct response to feedback from Kitchener citizens received through the extensive engagement process that informed the 2018 Customer Service Review and the Development Services Review, which concluded in 2020. PREVIOUS REPORTS/AUTHORITIES: There are no previous reports/authoritiesrelated to this matter. APPROVEDBY: MICHAEL MAY, Deputy CAO