Report to: General Committee Report Date: April 21, 2009
SUBJECT: Washrooms in Tourist Areas
PREPARED BY: Steve Andrews, Director of Asset Management
RECOMMENDATION:
1) THAT the report titled “Washrooms in Tourist Areas” dated April 8, 2009 be received;
2)
3) AND THAT Council authorizes Staff to retain the services of an architect and to proceed with the detailed design and construction tender of a public washroom facility in the parking lot of the Unionville Train Station in 2009;
4) AND THAT staff submit a site plan application and present the final design concept to Site Plan Committee prior to the issuance of the construction tenders and that the final design of the structures and signage be reviewed by Heritage Markham committee;
5) AND THAT appropriate on-street directional signage be installed on Main Street Unionville to indicate the location of the existing public washrooms in the Crosby Area and the new washrooms at the Unionville Train Station;
6) AND
THAT temporary washroom facilities be re-installed in
7) AND THAT the cost of $200,000 for the new washroom facilities, signage and the temporary washrooms be charged to Account Number 056-4399-8477-005 – New Public Washroom Feasibility Plan as established under the 2009 Capital Budget;
8) AND THAT Council direct staff to submit a 2010 budget request for the construction of a permanent washroom facility in Markham Village;
9) AND THAT Council direct staff to include the cost of maintenance in the 2010 Operating Budget for the maintenance of permanent washroom facilities in Unionville and Markham Village;
10) AND THAT Staff be authorized and directed to do all things necessary to give effect to this resolution
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
Not Required
PURPOSE:
The purpose of this report is to seek Council approval to support the need for public washrooms and appropriate directional street signage in both the Unionville and Markham Village downtowns. In addition, it is requested that Council approve an implementation strategy for the installation of the washroom facilities and appropriate directional sign in both locations.
BACKGROUND:
On March 25, 2008 Council authorized staff to review options for the provision of public washroom facilities in the Main Street tourist areas of the Town and retain the assistance of a consultant in this regard. The 2009 Capital budget contains a $200,000 budget for the construction of a washroom facility in one location.
In the summer of 2008 as part of this review and as a pilot to test potential locations, temporary washroom facilities were provided in the parking lot adjacent to the Craft Guild building on Robinson Street in Markham Village and adjacent to the bandstand on Fred Varley Drive in Unionville.
The Markham Village location proved to be an excellent location. It is discreet yet accessible, easy to access and free of odour or pedestrian impacts. It is well separated from any residential properties. This location is supported by the local community to be the location for a permanent washroom facility.
The Unionville location beside the bandstand proved to be unsatisfactory. The location generated complaints from adjacent residential homes who felt the location was too close and not adequately buffered from the homes. There were also complaints from the park users that felt the facility was not aesthetically compatible to the park setting and the events in the park like weddings and concerts. Staff subsequently directed the consultant to investigate and evaluate other potential locations in Unionville.
In addition it was noted that, while washrooms of a good size and generous operating hours exist in the Crosby Arena, many of the patrons of Unionville were not aware of their location because of inadequate on-street signage.
These 2008 experiences have proven useful in evaluating permanent washroom options.
In addition to
consultation with both Unionville and
· Public washrooms are provided in successful downtowns
· Financial responsibility always falls to the municipality, although there are a variety of operational arrangements for monitoring, maintenance, and supply of the washrooms
· The size and operating hours tend to be targeted toward shoppers, casual visitors, and families, particularly given the aging of the baby-boomer generation, rather than aimed at the pub crowd. Additional portable washrooms continue to be required for major special events
· Public Washrooms tend to be co-located with, or located in, other municipal buildings, when such buildings exist in downtown locations. When justified by the volume of usage, stand-alone facilities appear (as in Niagara on the Lake, Stratford or Port Dover). Where co-located, the best practice is a separate external access for the public (as at Crosby Arena)
· Public washrooms are always connected to municipal water and sewer
· A consistently high standard of monitoring, maintenance and supply of public washrooms is essential
· Easily visible on-street signage, as well as mapping of washrooms on brochures and websites, are best practices, albeit not consistently in evidence among the municipalities
Based on this work, 13 site-specific criteria were developed to evaluate public washroom options in Unionville and Markham Village:
· Capital Costs
· Cost of Maintaining and Supplying
· Land Ownership
· Regulatory Barriers to construction
· Discretion in the choice of location
· Security/Susceptibility to vandalism
· Local Impact of Pedestrian Traffic
· Potential for Odour
· Accessibility to event venues and attractions (walking)
· Wheelchair / Elderly/ Stroller Accessibility
· Heritage / Aesthetic Compatibility
· Sewer / Water Hook ups
Based on these criteria, the Markham Village location was confirmed as an excellent location.
Unionville required a more extensive review of potential site options. Following the initial review, only sites in public and preferably Town ownership were retained for further consideration. Also, it was concluded that any stand-alone option would require that the facility be build with strong heritage design features to ensure compatibility with adjacent architecture. The short listed options in Unionville included:
· Train Station—inside the station or in the adjacent parking lot
· Recycling Depot
· Bandstand—underneath, beside or behind
· Top of Stairs to the parking lot on the east side of Main Street.
· Status Quo with the existing facilities in the Crosby Arena, but adding directional signage to guide visitors to the arena where public washroom facilities currently exist
To be considered a viable option, estimated costs had to fall within the Council approved 2009 Capital budget of $200,000.
Staff researched the potential for the use of Automated or Self-cleaning Toilet Units. Several Communities in North America have or are proposing to install these units.
Seattle:
Seattle installed units in several locations. The units were manufactured in Germany and the City decided to lease the units rather than purchase them. The annual leased costs including maintenance is $100,000 per unit. The City charges the costs to the water rate. There is no user charge for their use. It appears the installations were not successful due to security and vandalism problems. The City has terminated its contract and is selling its toilets.
Vancouver:
Vancouver is proposing the installation of self-cleaning toilet in a number of locations at a cost about $300,000 per single unit. The costs of the units and their annual maintenance are to be paid from revenues from the City’s street furniture advertising contract.
Toronto:
Maintenance costs are not well established but is expected to be
significant and could be the reason why some cities have chosen a lease
agreement to cover it. Some of the costs
can be determined as:
· Maintenance of mechanical and electrical pumps and motors used in the automatic cleaning cycle.
· Supply of the sanitizer that is required after each use.
· Monitoring of the automated door to ensure that the door opens and closes properly after each use and is not jammed open or shut from ice build up or mechanical malfulction. It would not take long for serious damage to occur if the door sticks open during subzero celsius winter weather.
· Heating and air conditioning costs.
· Cleaning of debris left behind by users.
· Regular monitoring and physical inspection.
The cost of the automated toilets and their associated maintenance cost is
very high and exceed the construction budget.
It is also anticipated that the public acceptance of the automated
toilets with their ultra-modern design in these heritage locations will be
low.
The building of standard washroom facilities allow that each facility can
be custom designed by an architect to ensure that the design effectively integrates
with the heritage character of the area.
The design will be of a sustainable quality and be build to minimize the
cost of maintenance. Normal washroom
maintenance is estimated to cost:
· $10,000 per annum if closed during the five winter months of the year.
· $18,000 per annum for a year round facility.
OPTIONS/ DISCUSSION:
1. Sequencing of Construction in
Markham Village and Main Street Unionville.
The approved 2008 construction budget
provides for the construction of one washroom facility in either Unionville or
Markham Village. While both downtowns
are active and successful, visitors using the Unionville facility was confirmed
to be higher than in
On this basis, staffs recommend construction of a permanent washroom in downtown Unionville in 2009, with a re-installation of the temporary washrooms at the same location in Markham Village. It is recommended that funds for the construction of washrooms in Markham Village be included in the 2010 Budget requests.
2. Site Selection in downtown Unionville
In preparation for a community meeting in Unionville on March 12, 2009, a technical assessment of the short listed site options yielded the following results:
|
Train Station (inside) |
While the age of the train station poses some challenges in terms of retrofitting washrooms into one of the exist rooms inside the facility, this option represents the best value. It is estimated that six toilets could be accommodated within the building at a cost of $100,000. This represents the least cost, least disruption and least impact on the neighbourhood. However, there were many concerns from the community about the negative impact on the heritage integrity of the building and about the loss of a meeting room. There were also concerns about the close proximity of the homes located directed adjacent to the site. |
|
Train Station (in Parking Lot adjacent to Main Street) |
This location was preferred by staff because the site in open, accessible to the sidewalk on Main Street, is well buffered from any nearby residential properties and can be well landscaped. It is only a two minute walk from the band shell and is close to the train station for ease of maintenance. It has adjacent public parking available to its users. It can be architecturally designed to integrate well with the adjacent architecture. |
|
Recycling Depot |
There is very little publicly owned land on the site and there is not enough space to accommodate the washroom without the removal of part or the entire depot. There are also serious safety concerns about the conflicts between the users of the washrooms and the large number of vehicles that accesses the depot for drop off and pickup of the materials. Costs to relocate and rebuild the recycling depot elsewhere would exceed the budget. |
|
Bandstand |
The cost to build below the bandstand is prohibited and not recommended for a variety of reasons including poor accessibility, floodplain restrictions, security and complexity of construction and maintenance. The locations beside and behind the bandstand were determined to be too close to adjacent homes. These locations also were considered to have a negative impact on the aesthetic of the site. |
|
Top of Stairs |
This location
is fairly compact and construction of washroom facilities would be difficult
to integrate well into this small space given the close proximity of the
public sidewalk, adjacent buildings and the large slope down to the parking
lot at the rear. It is also felt that
this location is too far north and too close to the washrooms that are available
in the Crosby Area. There was concern with the potential loss of green space
on |
|
Signage |
In combination with any other option, signage informing visitors of the locations of public washroom facilities should be pursued. Appropriate signage needs to be developed and installed to clearly indicate location and hours of operation. |
A well-attended
public meeting was held on
Subsequently, architect and local resident David Johnston who was in attendance at the public meeting volunteered on behalf of the residents and BIA to review these two options with staff in further detail.
It was confirmed after a detailed review, that the Recycling Depot would not adequately accommodate the building of washroom facilities. There is very little publicly-owned land on the site and there is not enough space to accommodate the washroom without the removal of part or the entire depot. There are also serious safety concerns about the conflicts between the users of the washrooms and the large number of vehicles that accesses the depot for drop off and pickup of the materials. Costs to relocate and rebuild the recycling depot elsewhere would exceed the budget.
It was therefore concluded that the resident’s second choice would be the best location.
The east side of the train station parking lot is owned by the Town and is of sufficient size for a washroom. GO Transit has no objection to this location and all required services are available from Station Lane. The washroom entrance could be located facing Main Street and therefore give good public access from the existing sidewalk. It is felt that this location would allow a building to be positioned to have good visibility to the street and therefore good security for the public. To integrate with the existing heritage environment, the building can be designed with the same architectural features as the existing train station, i.e. with a platform overhang, sloped roof and board exterior finish. The washroom facilities will be subject to Site Plan Approval application.
It is concluded that the train station parking lot is the best site to construct a public washroom facility in the Unionville downtown. It is on Town-owned land, has available municipal services, good public access and visibility, well buffered from residential buildings and good security and is located at the southern end of the tourist area close to the bandstand.
FINANCIAL CONSIDERATIONS AND TEMPLATE: (external link)
Existing funding of $200,000 is available in the 2009 Capital Budget Account 056-5399-8477-005- New Public Washroom Feasibility Plan to undertake this work.
HUMAN RESOURCES CONSIDERATIONS
The washroom facility will be constructed using environmentally sustainable features.
ALIGNMENT WITH STRATEGIC PRIORITIES:
The washroom will be designed to meet current accessibility standards.
BUSINESS UNITS CONSULTED AND AFFECTED:
Business units consulted and potentially affected are Operations, Urban Design, Recreation Services and Cultural Services. Planning-Heritage Section was consulted and the Heritage Markham committee will be consulted on the design of both proposed facilities as well as the proposed signage.
RECOMMENDED
BY: ________________________ ________________________
Steve Andrews, P.Eng Brenda Librecz
Director of Asset Management Commissioner, Community
And Fire Services
Q:\Commission
Share\Operations and Asset Management\Reports\2009\Asset Management\Washroom in
Tourist Area.doc